I actually find it kinda funny ...

That the people who insist there are no conspiracies or black boxes or curses or normalization (which when you get right down to it are basically the same thing) are so convinced they are right that they are absolutely unwilling to consider for even a moment that maybe they are wrong ... They say there is no evidence to prove anything, but by that same logic isn't there also no evidence to DISPROVE anything as well???

egvrich, I refer you to Russell's Teapot. You can google it, or since your buddy Salty is an expert on everything including the butterfly effect, he can provide an erudite explanation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

I also refer you to Occam's razor.

I'm a big fan of Occam's Razor. It's never let me down yet. Also, knowing how a Bell Curve works has been awfully handy as well.

I'm a big fan of Occam's Razor. It's never let me down yet. Also, knowing how a Bell Curve works has been awfully handy as well.

leeroyjenkins, you know how the Bell Curve works, correct? Anything on the positive side is due to managerial acumen. Anything on the negative side is due to sinister black box trickery.

egvrich, I refer you to Russell's Teapot. You can google it, or since your buddy Salty is an expert on everything including the butterfly effect, he can provide an erudite explanation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

I also refer you to Occam's razor.

LMAO-- you make entirely flawed arguments, ad nauseum; doesn't take much of an 'expert' to point out.
Nor does the fact that I actually know what the butterfly effect is-
damn, I mean, one of us read the short story as a teenager; never mind the fact that there's also a movie based on the same concept. But i guess if you know what it is, then nobody else can or something?

TWO big, huge strikes here MacB.
1. Occam's razor is inapplicable as SoM themselves have already posted that black box items exist-- -
ergo, the 'simplest explanation' likely being the case can't actually be true.

2.You are now attempting to draw a parallel between proving god's existence and proving that there is some sort of black box-- which as I just stated, SoM has already said it exists.

you wanna go for 3?

egvrich, I refer you to Russell's Teapot. You can google it, or since your buddy Salty is an expert on everything including the butterfly effect, he can provide an erudite explanation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

I also refer you to Occam's razor.

LMAO-- Just bc you make entirely flawed arguments doesn't take much of an 'expert' to point out.
Nor does the fact that I actually know what the butterfly effect is-
damn, I mean, saw the film which used this idea decades ago. Literally dude...

TWO big strikes here MacB.
1. Occam's razor is inapplicable as SoM themselves have already posted that black box items exist-- -
ergo, the 'simplest explanation' likely being the case can't actually be true.

2.You are now attempting to draw a parallel between proving god's existence and proving that there is some sort of black box-- which as I just stated, SoM has already said it exists.

you wanna go for 3?

Salty, if you actually understood Russell's Teapot, which you don't, you would understand that it's about making unfalsifiable claims, not about the the existence of God. It was applied by Russell to the existence of God, but that is not the essence of the concept.

Again, as usual, you are wrong about Occam's razor. SOM has divulged which black boxes are on as posted by Charlie. You asserted without a modicum of proof that there are additional black boxes applying to 100 win team, re-injuries, normalization, ballpark doubles and triples, etc. What is you proof for this other than "I assert it's true and I'm Salty!"

From your posts and your record, it's pretty clear that your only skill is being an Internet bully. After being owned by Max Power in the other thread and your cowardice about participating in Barnstormers, it not clear you have much in the way of expertise to offer the community. I mean really, a .490 percentage in the playoffs, that's pretty embarrassing, eh?

Salty, if you actually understood Russell's Teapot, which you don't, you would understand that it's about making unfalsifiable claims, not about the the existence of God. It was applied by Russell to the existence of God, but that is not the essence of the concept.

Again, as usual, you are wrong about Occam's razor. SOM has divulged which black boxes are on as posted by Charlie. You asserted without a modicum of proof that there are additional black boxes applying to 100 win team, re-injuries, normalization, ballpark doubles and triples, etc. What is you proof for this other than "I assert it's true and I'm Salty!"

From your posts and your record, it's pretty clear that your only skill is being an Internet bully. After being owned by Max Power in the other thread and your cowardice about participating in Barnstormers, it not clear you have much in the way of expertise to offer the community. I mean really, a .490 percentage in the playoffs, that's pretty embarrassing, eh?

Red Herrings for sale, DJMACB has red herrings for sale...apparently cheap.

1. you are attempting to use 'occam's razor' to say there are 'no additional black box items' -- well since you don't even know ALL of what the black box items do specifically obviously occam's razor can't apply-- OBVIOUSLY DUDE - obtuse in they ways of the force you are.
Further-- are you so hyperliteral that you can't understand why the teapot analogy is simply wrong?

2. You suggest that i am somehow 'bullying' someone? who am i 'bullying' -- you mean Im not supposed to point out how bad someone's lack of logic is in making their argument or Im supposed to say it in such a way that you feel intelligent despite being wrong?

3. How exactly did Maxpower 'own' me? and if its true as you suggest, why isn't that bullying?
or is it only bullying when you don't like whats being said?

4. somehow my playoff winning percentage being .490 not as good as my regular season .524 means I have no clue what Im saying?
Even your bestie MaxPower has said his playoff winning isn't really controllable in the same way.
Further- I play mostly high caps- which most sane people know is the toughest to control outcomes.
Id challenge you to do better.

Please do clarify...im all ears.

.524 in the regular season. That's damn impressive. Clearly I was wrong and everything you state is 100% accurate.

Have a nice weekend

.524 in the regular season. That's damn impressive. Clearly I was wrong and everything you state is 100% accurate.

Have a nice weekend

Mac B--
Whats it like to live in Straw Man city? Is it nice there?

LOL- since you are the one who brought it up- and its obviously an ad hominem-
guess you are incapable of actually making a logical argument- obviously.

BTW- whats the correlation between winning pct and correct assertions Mac B?
Just for future reference so we know at which point we can make valid statements.

I'm a big fan of Occam's Razor. It's never let me down yet. Also, knowing how a Bell Curve works has been awfully handy as well.

leeroyjenkins, you know how the Bell Curve works, correct? Anything on the positive side is due to managerial acumen. Anything on the negative side is due to sinister black box trickery.

Yep. Pretty much something like that...