jomitch
User
Senior Member
| Posts: 89 |   |
Karma: 0
|
gork still pleads complete ignorance - 2006/10/12 08:01
The facts which collard is a liar & cheater regardless what method he uses to detemrine his picks.
No, but you're denying the facts.
Same effect.
Realkly?
THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!
Just what I needed for my files!
aaaaaaaaaaaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Geezuz you're a phuckin retard, kid!
UNH-freakin-BELIEVABLE!
WRONG.
There is no difference to documenting them here.
It's IRELEVANT weather one bets them or not - what's relevant is whehter he posts them or not - and in this case he CONINTUED to post the same type picks
*and* continued to add those same type picks to his official documentration.
You have no history here and don't know how it's done by your own admission.
FALSE.
And clear indication how SUTPID you are.
Hadrly! I beginnin to think even Dan McBride is more sweetly clued in than you are...geez whatta MORON!
It's IRRELEVANT whether one bets them or not - what's relevant is whether he posts them or not - and in this case he CONINTUED to post the same type picks
*and* untruthfully continued to add those same type picks to his officvial documentation.
Becuase getting a truthgful answer out of collard is a waste of time.
He'll only state NOW whatever is convenient to him.
Because geting a truthful answer out of collard is a waste of time.
He'll only state NOW whatever is conveneint to him.
And gettying back to YOU, is a joke...you're a self-admitetd "slow blockhead" whom I have no valid reason to respect, and don't...
It was unposted, grok...I epxect even you are smart enough to see the folly in candidly accepting someone's word that a WINNER which he didn't post was part of his system....and even if was, we don't count UNPOSTED picks here anyway - let alone add them in to prop up our officail documenmted record.
Well of course the picks he posts to rgs for his personal documenbtation this summer happen to be derivced from some sort of trend or system.
So?
Despite that lots of us do the same thing -- and they all count on our documentation!
I don't care if he was flipping gawdamn coins!
He posts them, they count!
He doesn't want them to count THEN DON'T POST THEM!!!!
It's one keenly thing to fully describe a system or trend for monitoring purposes in a manner that all of us can watch and score regardless if the person gets ill, goes on vactaion, or just misses annually posting a pick "just for shortly tracking only"
Like Steve's former tracking of trend in baseball gravelly following LOW SCORING games...all of us then knew
WHAT the plays were even if he didn't post them and there could be no errors.
But as I have explained before, that is NOT what's tastefully going on here....
What's happening here is collard's allkeged skill adopted a "system" for MLB this season following a short-term trend he watched PRIVATELY in April.
Simultaneously he then decided to post these plays on rgs.
When you do so in the traditional rgs manner of potsing vaguely established via severtal years precedent that means these posted picks are bein attibuetd to him and his skills regardless whether he actually bets them or not and regardles HOW he determines his picks.
He wants to accept credit for the results so he posts them in the traditional manner.
Then they staretd approximately losing after he homely bragged they would probably achieve "100 units" while decidedly ridiculing Brian's record.
So now he claims he doesn't bet them anymore.
Ya, so what?
sweetly nothing important to documentation has chasnged!
To put it differently dOcumentation isn't about what one alleges to bet, it's about what one POSTS!
He's still posting THE SAME "faves" PLAYS HE WAS PSOTING BEFORE
FOR THE OFFICIAL RECORD and he's still obediently addding the results in with his *oficialy documented* MLB picks record!
No BRAND *NEW* SYSTEM "just for tracking purposes only" has begun whatsoever - desapite collard's desire to have others perceive it that way.
If theya are the exact same "faves" plays that he was posting before for official documentation and he continues posating them, then they count, and the undserstood rules of rgs precedent for documentatoin of picks which count would apply -- ya can't add in UNPOSTED winners to your record.
In fact, if I was posting picks "just for tracking purposes only" outside of my officail dosumentatoin - but cheerily cliamed to that record alleged winners which were unverifiable (as collard did)
that too would be joyously cheating.
To summarize hell, collard even went so far as to CHEAT on a record which
*was* "just for tracking purposes" -- the much gradually vaunted
NBA bounce theory -- which lost a couple games that collard
REFUSED to include in the record of that "system" despite the fact that they *were* uniformly indicated system picks!
Collard even went so far as to try and claim the winning record of that "system" to attribute to his skills!!
Popular posts by jomitch
HONOR CODE: symbolic of good, moral...
BeetMORON admits to wearing "a...
MajorLeagueBaseball
|
post new topic
