Watford FC 1-0 Sunderland - 01/04/2017

No. I don't understand you at all HB1. And I doubt very much that the rest of the planet does either.

 

I think you guys are arguing different things:
- HB1 is talking about being criticized for using 60/40 rather than a more mathematically slender notation of 3/2.
- Kelso is talking about the fact that believing the chance of being relegated is 40% is unrealistic.

Am I the forum Jeremy Kyle?

 

Thanks for clarifying you got it wrong. I am gracious enough to except your apology. Everyone makes mistakes, but just be sure about it the next time you try to get the upper hand.

This is a forum about the general issues of Watford FC. Just try to keep it that way and stop trying to start personal fights.....as you are not quite up to it from what I can see.

 

Seriously....have you never heard someone say "I think it's 50/50 we win this".....or 60/40......or anything along those lines? Really, really?

It's a sliding scale of 100.......it's called a percentage.

 

I'll leave it to the audience at this Comedy Store production to form their own opinion ...

 

Kin ell... some of you lot will pick a fight over absolutely nothing! You need to get laid...

Onto football..we won't go down, Maz should be given some credit for getting us to safety with a backdrop of a horrendous season of injuries but this season has been really, really dull.

 

It's a Comedy Store of your own creation.....and you are certainly the joke in this sorry episode.

 

I've been introduced to this concept on many an occasion but never with such hilarity.

 

Nope. 60/40. 3/2. 40% chance ... All mean exactly the same thing ... HB1 doesn't understand that at all.

 

So if you do know the phrase......why have you written two pages saying you don't understand and claiming it was some crazy bookies odds quote?

Don't need to answer, as I know why. It's sad so many people like to do this. Take a valid post off-key and ruin a thread. What I don't know is why do you deliberately want to do this. You now have made yourself look foolish, and cannot be taken seriously in the future.

Can't you see, it tells everyone on here that you don't have anything to say.

Disagree with me, tell me why you think my opinion is not in line with yours, but as soon as you go down the ridicule road, you will always end up the loser. I hope this is a lesson learnt, but I doubt it.

 

You're all *****.

 

This forum is full of nasty **** all the time these days

And yet people are put off posting by 'wages,' or 'Hogg's on lone' posts rather than every page being 70/30 full of one poster insulting another

 

This will be my last post on the matter. You must be a troll. But on the remote chance you're not then what you need to understand is this. Odds and percentages are freely interchangeable. You can always and very easily convert one to the other. You even did it for me. 60/40 adds up to one hundred percent. Everyone else on here understands that except you apparently which is why you're looked upon as the class clown to be either ridiculed or humoured. Goodnight.

 

Last word from you? I very much doubt that. Storm off in a huff by all means, but you could make amends by issuing an apology. You misunderstood something I wrote and are too proud to admit it. Did you know pride comes before a fall? I hope the bump doesn't hurt too much.

I actually quite like you though and hold no malice towards you. I wish you would prefer to debate real things instead of nonsense. There are plenty of c**** on here so please do not join the growing band. I do not mind being the most irritating poster or most hated one. I will always stick by my beliefs as time usually proves them to be bang on the money. I trust my instinct, but if I'm wrong about something I will always admit to it........not happened yet though but I'm sure it will one day. :]]

 

You mean 70:30? Idiot.

 

I'm going Burlington Bertie this isn't your last post.

 

Who wants a fight ? Outside . Now .

 

Thought there were positives in the game yesterday and was pleased to see Doucoure have a good game.

Completely disagree with the idea of our crossing being impressive though. Poor end product was a feature of the game throughout and the crossing was most definitely included in that. Despite having a shortage of players In the box it was just hopelessly looped towards the back post and usually well past if.

I actually think crossing and attacking balls into the box are the main thing we need to work on. Poor delivery and static forwards make us far to easy to defend against. Time and time again we get into good areas out wide and completely waste it

 

Night night, poppet. X

 

I'm clearly not on anyone's side here, and I can get as bored as anyone by HB1's posts, whilst also agreeing with a fair degree of his sentiments at times; there is logic to some of what he says, although he usually takes it too too far of an extreme.

That being disclaimered, I've just caught up with the last two pages of this thread and I'm sorry KelsoOrn, but in this instance you have picked a bizarre and incoherent fight and then carried it on for a long time whilst simultaneously trying to reframe your original point and act as though it was HB1 picking the fight. There was literally nothing wrong with his use of an extremely popular and well known expression to express a loose probability, and it's fairly transparent now when you claim that HB1 doesn't understand the relative phrasing odds.

So yeah, that's me. I don't really know why I decided to attempt to play teacher here, I guess I weighed up the odds of whether it would be worth it or not, and they came out about 60-40.

 

Really. I'm staggered! It remains plain to me that HB1 hasn't got an effing clue what he's talking about. What is this 60/40 we'll stay up *******s?

Ed. Googled it. OK. New one on me.

 

OK HB1. Amazingly, thanks to Chumlax's intervention, it looks like I do owe you an apology on this occasion. Genuinely never heard the phrase before.

 

Last word? You said "last word"........now you've now sent Luther Bassett Burlington Bertie.

JW and Chumax have understood, yet you stay steadfast in denial.

I think it's fair to say, you've had an absolute mare tonight.

 

Never heard the phrase before. Is all. I have seen you use that phrase though.

 

You've contradicted yourself and I'm just surprised at why you decided to pick up on this in the first place and continued it.

But I accept your apology with good grace and I respect the fact you're big enough to do this, unlike BRLR, who accused me of being a liar and was also proved to be wrong about that. He's was not big enough and is just a coward. So fair play to you for that.

Also thanks to Chumlux for getting involved, as very few on here would ever put themselves in the firing line by openly siding with me.

 

I meant the concept of percentages. Not the phrase. Simply never heard it used loosely to mean 'better than evens' like that before. Therefore I took it literally throughout.

 

Was actually quite enjoying the content of this forum for a while there, ah well

 

No worries mate, we are all fans at the end of the day, after all.

 

Incredible. One minute HB is being finished off by a maniac wielding an electric saw, the next thing is the maniac himself is dead and HB is coolly swapping blood samples to avoid being implicated. You could make a gripping TV police thriller out of it...

 

Yep, was quite good for a couple of weeks.

 

The way HB1 talks almost makes me believe he's in some version of Tron where all the users on here are real people he interacts with. That's why he talks of 'firing lines' and 'having a mare', like there's some real audience watching, actually caring and baying for blood.

I hope I look like Jeff Bridges in his reality.

End of line.

 

Never seen Star Wars either. Have I been missing something?

 

HB1 shouldn't push his luck though. To use a phrase that I now understand loosely means 'better than evens' remains fairly tenuous given what the actual odds are.

Ever seen one of those films when a supposedly dead maniac isn't actually dead at all? Schwarzenegger plays quite a few of those roles.

 

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the quote. Could you explain this a bit more?

 

Change of circumstance. Like in Scotland ...