Ally Bongo's Content - Page 428 - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Ally Bongo

Member
  • Posts

    11,982
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    17

Posts posted by Ally Bongo

  1. Only if you don't know how to do it properly :-))

    Key is in the word gamble (betting on a chance outcome). Learn from what the bookies do. They don't gamble, They operate a business whereby they offer and take bets based on a thorough understanding of odds (probability), randomness, reversion to the mean and intrinsic value. But above all that they also understand psychology and that most people gamble because it's more important to them to be able to brag that they called it correctly than to be consistently profitable (what Freud called the ego). To those people it's all about being right more often than being wrong, regardless of whether they make any real money or not.

    Successful gamblers understand they will probably be wrong more often than they will be right (that their strike rate is immaterial) because by only betting to value odds and staking their bets properly they accumulate steady and consistent profits.

    There are stats aplenty that show (across the spectrum of categories) favourites in horse races only win between 25-35% of races. Yet people still blindly bet a favourite at odds of less than 4/1. That's not to say a fave at shorter odds, or even odds-on, isn't the genuine odds favourite. But it says you cannot come out ahead by blindly betting favourites - and it helps explain why bookies make money consistently.

    Thats_plenty.jpg

  2. Now. These days. They are very uncomfortable. I am led to believe.

    Another irk about the SFA and how little they feel about the fans is summed up in the hiring of Daryl Broadfoot who had spent years slagging Scotland fans off

    We really should have chucked it then ....

  3. I doubt petitions will work Susan and there is no way they will change the prices after the campaign has started & tickets have been sold

    There is only one tactic that will

    We all know what that is

  4. Surely if that was the case they'd have just burned the church down, especially given the writing on the church wall.

    The whole concept of not catching the virus if ingested bothers me. Take the scene from 30 Days Later when it goes in his eye and he turns. Surely if it goes into your eye it has the same effect as a bite. Yet they're slashing eveything that moves. Think it has to do with making the killing scenes gorier andmore enjoyable.

    In series one Rick dorns a pair of goggles so as not to get any blood spatter in his eye at one point so yes it would turn you if it happened and so yes they have just skipped over that technicality

    Everyone is infected and when they die you turn

    If bitten and it gets into you blood stream then you get blood poisoning & die & then turn - same as with eating infected meat.

    No spoilers so dont read the bottom

    from the book there is a character that has been bitten and then eaten by the hunters - they die and turn

    The preacher is a coward and locked everyone out his church - that is his only crime

    So we are right

    Dont want to know about the black car & who drives it

  5. Quick note from Episode one.

    Remember in Terminus when rick let the mental guy with the tattoos on his face out after carol had set the place alight.

    He was the same guy in the flashback at the end where one of Gareth group gets taken away for a raping.

    Guessing he'll be a part in this.

    Was he not taken down by walkers just after they let him out ?

    Re my last post - surely they would have noticed if Bob had been bitten ...unless it was his other leg ...too many questions

  6. You are absolutely right, and I am not pretending for a minute that the vow wasn't made. It was and should be honoured. My beef is with the SNP leadership putting it about that the vow was the only reason they lost, and since the vow is bound to be reneged on, the nation had been conned, the result was invalid, and we need a rerun. It's pretty obvious what they're doing. On the referendum night itself Sturgeon, with an eye on the future, was spouting her 'Scotland has voted for change', nonsense, when the only thing we knew for certain was that Scotland had done precisely the opposite, albeit by a fairly narrow margin. I have no problem with Yes voters, and no problem with people continuing to campaign for independence, but it should be done on the merits of the case, not based on Salmond and Sturgeon's mischief/myth making. Don't get taken for a ride on the betrayal bandwagon.

    Phil - there were many avenues of betrayal and not just "the vow" which the SNP is not stating was the only reason they lost

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4nRk_kb39Y

×
×
  • Create New...