OT: The Throwing vs Hitting Tennis Bet

[baronzeus]

yeah, i just checked. i made no references to stanford in the condescending manner to which you are referring. el d you gotta get off that now.


edit: in fact the only douchebag thing I can find is the part where i made fun of him for playing 33 SNGs, and it was because i was really pissed at him for doing something immoral. on top of that i apologized for that comment and Nick accepted my apology.

[tolbiny]

[ QUOTE ]


#1: Yes, I believe there's a huge difference between Nick lying about his qualifications (which he didn't do

[/ QUOTE ]

Nick said "I know that I have no chance against him". This is an outright lie if he believes he is a favorite (as it is my impression that he does). If he had siad- "i am a great tennis player, i can beat anyone in this room at any sport" and i replied
"have you grappling experience?" to wchich he said he hadn't he would be hustling me if he did. Regarless of what his tennis skill is, he intentionally misrepresented his ability in a non tennis game. He lied. Regarding your "stanford students" point, he put the messages out there on a public board trying to hook anybody, not aiming at stanford people. How good of a lie it is also is irrelevant (to many is's), his attempt to gain money via lying doesn't make it moral if he fails.

[ QUOTE ]

#2: The changing their minds part after agreeing to the bet was weak and shows a lack of gambling honor/integrity.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree somewhat. I would agree more if they had specified all the terms (glove,no glove, odds and amount of wager) and agreed and then backed out. They never got nearly that far and that makes a big difference (to me).

[luckyharr]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Im to lazy to look for it...but the gist was

"Ken and I...two STANFORD students, are to smart to rush into things without thinking"

[/ QUOTE ]


i think ken wrote that, not sure tho...

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
furthermore BZ and I are [censored] stanford students. you really think we're going rush into this deal without any research? please.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, it was ken.

[mntbikr15]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
El D,

get off the stanford students thing. i dont think i made one reference to stanford in this thread.... (although i dont remember everything i posted)

[/ QUOTE ]

Im to lazy to look for it...but the gist was

"Ken and I...two STANFORD students, are to smart to rush into things without thinking"

[/ QUOTE ]


i think ken wrote that, not sure tho...

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed he did.

My bad.

I think you personally are getting a bad rap in this thread.

Ken on the other hand is quite the cum stain

[El Diablo]

tolb,

To me, the lying Nick has done in this thread is comparable to misrepresenting your hand in a poker game. If you disagree with that, fine.

The Stanford comment had to do w/ bz's buddy so proudly proclaiming how smart they are and how they wouldn't be tricked, though it turns out that in fact they were pretty much the dimmest bulbs in the thread.

"They never got nearly that far"

ken: "Nick, I will use a racquet, you can catch. I'll play you for any amount of money"

Nick: "Kao then we will play for 5k. You set the date and I will pay for your flight, if you win, you refund me. Am I using the glove or not?"

I'd say they were pretty close.

[Case Closed]

el d,

Do you propose that ken goes through with this and plays this game for said amount of money?

[El Diablo]

bz,

You seem to have missed a couple of questions in this thread. Please answer the following:

1) Have you ever played a guy at poker who you thought was likely drunk and tilting?

Also
--
Ken was certain he would win the bet. Lots of big talk then:

"I don't get how in any way you can beat me throwing the ball."

When Ken believed that, he said:

"I will use a racquet, you can catch. I'll play you for any amount of money"
--

2) When Ken believed he was an absolute lock and Nick had no chance, was it immoral of Ken to make this bet?

[wdead]

BZ: I never had an opinion of you before reading this thread. After reading it, I find it surprising you go to Stanford considering your inability to engage in simple logical analysis. Also, I think El D is right. You are a classless douchebag.

[tolbiny]

[ QUOTE ]

To me, the lying Nick has done in this thread is comparable to misrepresenting your hand in a poker game. If you disagree with that, fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree and feel that it is closer to lying about your poker experience to try to get someone to sit in a game.

[ QUOTE ]
ken: "Nick, I will use a racquet, you can catch. I'll play you for any amount of money"

Nick: "Kao then we will play for 5k. You set the date and I will pay for your flight, if you win, you refund me. Am I using the glove or not?"


[/ QUOTE ]

If Ken agreed to this and then backed out i agree his a douchbag. In fact it seems to me that both sides were engaged in some level of docuhiosity. Fun to watch but my point was more that i feel Nick was just as involved.

On a side tangent i began disagreeing with you because i dislike the way you approached the problem with BZ. From the impression i have of you (only through your posts) you have enough life experience to know that callinga 20 yr old with a big ego (like BZ) a douche will ony put him on the defensive even more and make him look like a bigger one. Amusing to watch at times, but it personally makes me a little sad when i remeber that my impression of you in the Ulyssys days was much better.

[El Diablo]

cc,

"All you and Ken had to do was say 'wow, we sure stepped into something without thinking, but now that we are seriously thinking about doing this, we've realized we spoke up too boldly and too soon. Sorry, Nick, we have to back out of this one. Drinks on us.' "