Texsox

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 14, 2011 -> 08:12 AM) the odds are still that you will leave a loser. All those games guarantee a loser because the house removes some of the "points". I do agree that the skill factor is highest in poker than the other games. My point is in all these games, if everyone played perfectly every hand, there will still be losers because of the house cut. Whether the house takes a cut by altering the payouts (Craps) or just skimming each hand (poker) they guarantee a loser. And in all those games there are winners and losers. The big difference is poker is the only game (+ parimutuals) I can think of that also guarantees a winner. Since the house limits their cut, someone has to win something. In Blackjack, craps, etc. it is possible for the house to bankrupt everyone.

I'll buy two. One to drink and one to save.

LOL it's pep rally day and I'm teaching my students the Seminole War Chant and Tomahawk chop. We're divided into University teams and ours is FSU. Unconquored and Chief Oceola will ride today.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 14, 2011 -> 06:30 AM) I'm not aware of there being "computer opponents" at the major online poker sites. Poker rooms, real or virtual, make their money differently than other casino games. You don't play poker against the house, you play against other players and the house makes their money by taking a cut of every pot. It's the only game in a casino where you do actually have a fair shake at winning, unless you are an expert card counter playing blackjack. The house takes a cut in every game, it just varies how they are taking it. Functionally there really isn't much difference. Players put in $X and are competing for $X-Cut. The players as a group will always lose to the house.

Unless each day can be looked back upon by an individual as one in which he has had some fun, some joy, some real satisfaction, that day is a loss. We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The best morale exists when you never hear the word mentioned. When you hear a lot of talk about it, it's usually lousy. Un-American activity cannot be prevented or routed out by employing un-American methods; to preserve freedom we must use the tools that freedom provides. All from Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1890 - 1969

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Oct 13, 2011 -> 07:08 PM) QFFT Also the worst part about those online poker sites (which I always suspected anyway) is that the games were rigged to allow computer opponents to win hands. You literally didnt have a fair shake at winning. Which isn't much different than every game, computer or dealer in Vegas.

I was trying to frame a post that showed that K-Dubya and Dunn were screwed and they actually should have been placed much higher, but, 8th is about right. With another .150ish season, and he moves up to the top 3.

LOL at wanting a guy addicted to painkillers and more worried about signing an extension than his team's chances/

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Oct 13, 2011 -> 12:43 PM) Oh the irony. Message board posters talking about all it takes to manage a team because we are such experts while at the same time saying a guy whi played 2000 games wouldn't know how to deal with such issues. Nicely played sir.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 13, 2011 -> 03:44 PM) I'm going to have to pick up this book... It's pretty clear to me, and I consider myself to be a reasonably intelligent person, that to write off the Native Americans, or any of the ancient cultures, for that matter, as ignorant or unsophisticated is incredibly ignorant in and of itself. Yet don't we do that with many cultures and countries today? Don't we look down at other countries in so many different ways. I'm recalling something as simple as going outside of the US for medical treatments that are not approved of here. When someone does that (cough Maggs) we assume it can't be for the quality of the care but some other reason. And please don't ask me to go find the thread. We seem to believe that all the great advances will come from the US. Our form of government is the best for all people. Our religious, social, sexual, and whatever other freedom we can think of is the best for all cultures.

Or, like many companies, in brain storming you create a list of every possible idea and start looking from there. I would hope they started with a list about 100 names deep.

A lot of the cotton that got around the Union blockade came through my area of the world. Once they shipped it to Texas it was fairly easy to smuggle it into Mexico and once on Mexico flagged ships, it was safe passage east. I know I was surprised when I learned that the US was about the last country to ban slavery. That gave us the competitive advantage, combined with Slatter stealing textile mill trade secrets, to build great wealth. It was also stolen tobacco seeds that started that industry and slaves that kept it going. Drop a couple bombs on Japan and invent a practical computer and you have the greatest country in the world.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 13, 2011 -> 02:47 PM) Well, it's no revelation at this point, and I don't mean to state the obvious...but Lincoln is portrayed as this great friend to the African American people...whereas he was simply much more concerned about keeping the Union together. He didn't want slavery spreading throughout all the new territories, but he didn't really have an issue with slavery continuing in the south for the forseeable future. The Emancipation Proclamation was certainly not issued because Lincoln was concerned about freeing the slaves, either...he was just tapping another available resource to him. This is not to say that Lincoln believed in slavery or the Southern way of life, but to say that he was some great advocate for the slaves simply because it was morally unacceptable is to not exactly be clear. Again, maybe it's a bit of an issue of the age of the learning audience, as you pointed out. Lincoln had spoke out against slavery years before he became president. It is true that he was willing to allow slavery to remain in the south, but he was against any additional slave states being added to the union. I would not go so far as to say he didn't have an issue with it. I believe it would be more accurate to say that stopping the spread was probably the practical limit to what could have been done at the time. Most people incorrectly assume that the Emancipation Proclamation freed all slaves. Actually slaves that were living in the north were not freed, only in the Confederate States. And yes it was much of a war tactic as a moral issue. It also was brilliant in that it effectively stopped any European country from coming to the help of the Confederacy. I've read some interesting papers that theorize that France or Spain may have come to the aid of the southern states. That would have been a game changer. What is interesting to me was a debate at the time whether slavery was more a legal or moral issue.

It wasn't like race relations were better in 1865 than 1965. The whole storyline of whites were fighting to free the slaves is kind of over dramatized. It wasn't like there were jobs or great opportunitities for blacks after the war. My students do find it strange that black men received sufferage before white women.

Actually sailors knew the world wasn't flat, they had sailed away from the coast enough to know that. What they did not know was how big it was. The reason for the near mutiny was they were in danger of running out of fresh water and food if the voyage took too long. They were at the point where they had enough food and water for return trip. Columbus was asking for just one more day for three or four days when they began spotting signs of land.

BTW Lies my Teacher Told Me is a decent history book.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Oct 13, 2011 -> 10:26 AM) According to many of the History Channel specials I've seen, Lee owned slaves, but he was torn at the onset of the war on which side to fight. I can't recall the reason that he might have wanted to fight on the North (perhaps it was his history at West Point?), but there was something. Lee had taken an oath to defend the country against all enemies. He had a hard time splitting those loyalties. He was also Lincoln's first choice to lead the Union forces. Another factor was he fought with many of the Union leaders in Mexico.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 13, 2011 -> 07:33 AM) You don't have to say f*** a lot to be funny. Will Robin bring in an inflata-mate and stuff bats into the openings? That's the sort of slumpbusters this team needs.

QUOTE (GoodAsGould @ Oct 13, 2011 -> 02:46 AM) Robin did say none of his daughters tweet so already an upgrade in that department. I'll bet they do and he's not allowed to follow lol

The quickest path back to the playoffs is retooling, it is also the most reasonable giving the contract situations. Ozzie, even with his WS wins and all the experience that the folks in Florida love, couldn't get this team into the playoffs. An approach 180 from his would seem like the best approach. Three years is also about the time some flexibility in contracts will happen and the team could either be doing well or able to rebuild, not just retool. I am liking the move. Robin is not trying to take the limelight away from the players which I hope means he will not be taking the responsibility away from the players. It isn't like his leadership and managing potential has not been noticed before. He's had zero time actually doing the part of the job that everyone but Greg believes is the most important, managing players instead of the media. I'm looking forward to his crazy mistakes in spring training and how he does when they start playing for reals.

QUOTE (MuckFinnesota @ Oct 12, 2011 -> 08:14 PM) Would this actually work and could they make enough revenue to put out a team with a payroll of, say, $100 million? There's no gravity in baseball . . .

Saying the Sox shouldn't worry about the Cubs is like telling Pepsi not to worry about Coke. After the hardcore baseball fans you have the folks that go to a game or two a year. There are lots of them. The club is in a battle to sell tickets, advertising, and TV ratings. Their biggest competitor makes a bold move, advantage competitor.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 12, 2011 -> 08:44 AM) Anyone watch last night's debate? Caught parts of it. Man is Perry terrible, that guy is just going to continue plummeting. While I think Herman Cain is completely out of his league, I wonder if his 9-9-9 stuff might keep him in the race for a while. Romney has really solidifed himself as the guy to beat, again. I don't see anyone in this field having much of a chance to beat him, unless a bunch of people drop out and the far-right can prop up one, ultra-conservative candidate against him. Perry needs to get away from debates and get on the stump, that is where he really shines. Plus as soon as the TV ads start in the primary states, he'll rebound.

Seems as if the Braves called him. I believe in another thread it was supposed that Walker would never even have another interview.

If you can't make it in Chicago, how could it make it anywhere else? It's not like he failed in Boston. If you failed in Boston or New York, there is still a chance for you to make it in Chicago. But once you fail in Chicago, your career is pretty much over.