4th September 2006, 05:50 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 1970
Location: Sydney
Posts: 402
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Moderator 3
Please note:
Posters are entitled to ask whether a betting method stacks up mathematically. People are entitled to disagree with a post and substantiate their position.
An inability to understand the maths of racing and handicapping, or a lack of interest in that area is fair enough.
But that does not give a poster the right here to accuse others who believe maths is important for understanding racing and handicapping of making a "personal slanging match" because they raise these issues. Nor is name calling acceptable.
Moderator.
|
Once more I've trawled through this thread before presenting my considered contribution.
One clear offender throughout this is Chrome Prince. But rather than this regular being cautioned for his violation of the T&C he continues unhampered. Meanwhile some of those rightly challenging him have mysteriously vanished.
On repeated occasions he presented such edicts:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chrome Prince
To make $50,000 per year on a $4,000 bank is impossible - fact.
...
The bank would never withstand it - mathematical fact.
...
I don't buy it - sorry.
...
- it doesn't add up.
.....
If you do the math properly it's obvious that he is the one ridiculing us
|
All this before TheEasyRun had an opportunity to mention what "it" actually was.
Where was the substantiation?
And when first Sahasastar, then I, presented alternate valid mathematical demonstrations how it can be done, he made no effort to learn from that and mend his ways.
There is no point in repeating the T&C when certain regulars are permitted to flaunt their disregard for them or any common decencies.
|