Jump to content

WBT

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    39273
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by WBT

  1. 41CPuGmb-eL._SX328_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

    Meh.  The governess's reactions were just odd.  Instead of having the reaction of "holy shit, there's ghosts here," she's more obsessed with whether or not the children can see and are talking to them.  And yet she's afraid to ask the children or their uncle about the ghosts.  Just strange.

  2. 5 hours ago, UTexasFight said:

    An algorithm would absolutely quickly help crack a code of ~5-8 signs being put down per pitch.

    I don't see how it would figure out much faster than someone just watching the screen.

  3. 7 hours ago, Beau Vine said:

    The way Codebreaker worked was simple: Somebody would watch an in-game live feed and log the catcher’s signs into the spreadsheet, as well as the type of pitch that was actually thrown. With that information, Codebreaker determined how the signs corresponded with different pitches. Once decoded, that information would be communicated through intermediaries to a baserunner, who would relay them to the hitter.

    Let me get this straight.  They watched the catcher's signs and then watched what pitch was thrown?  And we needed an excel-based application to determine that there was a correlation between the signs and the pitch thrown?  Sounds like we had ourselves an Alan fucking Turing on the case.

  4. 2 hours ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

     Hinch punched Astros fans in the gut by saying the title is tainted. 

    No he didn't.

    Quote

    Question: Is the Astros' 2017 title tainted?

    Hinch: "It's a fair question. I think everyone is going to have to draw their own conclusions. I hope over time, and the demonstration of the talent of this team and the players and the careers that are being had -- we have some of the best players in the entire sport all together on the same team -- I hope over time, it's proven that it wasn't. But I understand the question."

    And he's right.  People are going to say we won because we cheated even though we're still going to kick ass this year.  Who gives a shit?

    • Like 2
  5. 20 hours ago, Pimphand said:

    Do people still like/defend Hinch‽

    100%.  Many teams were doing this or something similar.

    So are we ever going to hear about a Red Sox punishment, or nah?  Seems like Manfred is hoping everyone forgets about it.

  6. 7 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

    So much for State’s Rights. Guess it is Red State’s Rights now. 
     

    if a standard response to people that are unhappy in the US with the president, it’s policies, etc., is to GTFO, why aren’t states allowed to govern the same way and if a citizen doesn’t like it they can gtfo and move to another state? 

    PM Honest Abe?

  7. 7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

    Once a Republican, always a Republican.

    Always nice to have you in the Dem threads.

    Quote

    Pollster Frank Luntz tested the phrase with a focus group in 2001, and concluded that the only people who really disliked the epithet were highly partisan Democrats.[10] Political analyst Charlie Cook attributed modern use of the term to force of habit rather than a deliberate epithet by Republicans.[11] Journalist Ruth Marcus stated that Republicans likely only continue to employ the term because Democrats dislike it,[2] and Hertzberg calls use of the term "a minor irritation" and also "the partisan equivalent of flashing a gang sign".[10]

     

    • Like 1
  8. 19 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

    btw, for those saying "the republican iowa caucus didn't declare a winner in in 2012 for two weeks", it actually was worse.  they went into it on cnn.  they actually declared romney the winner that night.  then two weeks later, changed it and said that santorum actually won.  talk about not being able to capitalize on the iowa momentum.  this is bad, but that's fucked.  think if they declared warren the winner live last night, then after nh and south caro, they came back and said, "wait, bernie actually won my bad lol."

    Yeah but they said on election night that Romney won by 8 votes and later said Santorum won by 22 votes, or whatever the numbers were.  I'm sure it made a big difference in how the campaigns tried to spin it but to all but the dumbest voters it was apparent the night of the caucus that it was a statistical tie.

    Here they still haven't said anything official 16 hours later.  I don't think this is that big of a deal either but in certain ways it is worse.

×
×
  • Create New...