keylime Posted June 14, 2004 Report Share Posted June 14, 2004 With the fait accompli assumption that Nickell will stay Stateside, who do you think will be tapped by Welland to finish out the team? Poll listed in the sister thread. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwayne Posted June 14, 2004 Report Share Posted June 14, 2004 Stansby-Martel. Redouble. Dwayne-da-rat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwayne Posted June 14, 2004 Report Share Posted June 14, 2004 keylime wrote:With the fait accompli assumption that Nickell will stay Stateside, who do you think will be tapped by Welland to finish out the team? Poll listed in the sister thread. So I'd thought I'd amuse myself and trawl the internet: - The odds of winning the California Super Lotto Jackpot are 1 in 18 million- Dealt a royal flush on the opening hand in a poker game (1 in 649,739)- Killed by terrorists while traveling abroad (1 in 650,000)- Die during an average life span from: flesh-eating bacteria (1 in 1 million) heart disease from eating a broiled steak a week (1 in 48,000) a lightning strike (1 in 30,000) cancer from eating a peanut butter sandwich a day (1 in 5,000) Which I know means nothing but at least the Nickell team should cut down on their peanut butter sandwich intake. Dwayne-entino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrdct Posted June 14, 2004 Report Share Posted June 14, 2004 Does the statistical risk of being killed by terrorists increase or decrease by travelling abroad? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwayne Posted June 14, 2004 Report Share Posted June 14, 2004 Good point dt. Actually that got me thinking. we all know the chances of winning Lotto (say 6 from 46) if you don't buy a ticket is ..well..it's 0. But if you buy a ticket..and to be fair let's say you buy 10 games your chances increase to a staggering 1 in 936682. I say we dont form a syndicate. Agreed? Dwaynester. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerben47 Posted June 14, 2004 Report Share Posted June 14, 2004 Then the question is, if even Istanbul is considered too dangerous, will we ever see the Nickell team in a Bermuda Bowl again. They're mostly held abroad... Or maybe they stay at home. Now that I think of it, don't most accidents occur at home. Well, maybe stay in a hospital bed 24/7 then... BTW, what is the chance of being murdered by an irrational murderer who doesn't know bridge in the US? Better or worse than 1 in 650,000? The last time I visited the US there was a highway sniper on the loose in the region. Very safe indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted June 14, 2004 Report Share Posted June 14, 2004 Can anyone explain why the conditions of contest permitted teams to compete in the USBF team trials with no intention of actually attending the event in question? I realize that this is a complex issue, and one where many differences of opinion exist. However, from my perspective, any pair unwilling to compete in Turkey should have been excluded from the event from the outset. Top seeds, particularly ones of the calibre of the Nickell team, who enter with no intention of competing in Istanbul severely bias the selection process. In particular, knock-outs are very "fair" methods to select the #1 team. However, they are not a fair method to identify the #2 team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRG Posted June 14, 2004 Report Share Posted June 14, 2004 Can anyone explain why the conditions of contest permitted teams to compete in the USBF team trials with no intention of actually attending the event in question? I realize that this is a complex issue, and one where many differences of opinion exist. However, from my perspective, any pair unwilling to compete in Turkey should have been excluded from the event from the outset. Top seeds, particularly ones of the calibre of the Nickell team, who enter with no intention of competing in Istanbul severely bias the selection process. In particular, knock-outs are very "fair" methods to select the #1 team. However, they are not a fair method to identify the #2 team. No, I cannot explain it. It seems wrong to allow teams to compete in a selection process if they have no intention of being the representatives if they win. I think you make a valid point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke warm Posted June 15, 2004 Report Share Posted June 15, 2004 i never thought about it, but now that i have i agree... it does seem a little unfair... it'd be like the patriots saying "we're gonna play in all the playoff games we qualify for up to the league championship, but if we win we won't go to the superbowl" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trpltrbl Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Can anyone explain why the conditions of contest permitted teams to compete in the USBF team trials with no intention of actually attending the event in question? I realize that this is a complex issue, and one where many differences of opinion exist. However, from my perspective, any pair unwilling to compete in Turkey should have been excluded from the event from the outset. Top seeds, particularly ones of the calibre of the Nickell team, who enter with no intention of competing in Istanbul severely bias the selection process. In particular, knock-outs are very "fair" methods to select the #1 team. However, they are not a fair method to identify the #2 team. I totally agree, but maybe Nickell can buy the US marines or the French Foreign Legion to protect his, at least in his eyes, important a..But I am sure that as soon as he is overseas, pretty much nobody will recognize him. Mike :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.