Becareful,

My original comments on this thread were a response to Dale pointing out [in another thread] about the lack of comment his ideas where geting regarding his thread here.
My preface comment : "Point taken, so I'll put my Two Bobs worth here" refers to that.

My opinion[s] in my post were not "statements" [of facts] that needed "correcting".

Disagree with me sure, but to correct ? If you wish to claim the mantle that response implies, fine by me but beware the burden that comes with it.

Most punters know that one man's punting Bible can easily be another man's toilet paper and with that very much in mind, I presented my opinions and maxims and Marks response was fine [as he can I'm sure speak for himself], but your latest post invites comment I think.

My comments about place betting as well as some of my other opinions, were a generalisation [ie. "smoking is bad for your health", but just because there are 90yr. olds still smoking, does not make that point invalid] only concering most punters and in the spirit of the original thread.
Mark had not even posted on this thread until after my comments that included place beting and his following opinion[s] were accepted as that.

As to my incorrect "statements" I made according to you , how about addressing them to the writer? rather than to the forum as if a corrected pupil?

Saying that someone bets with a bookie for set place odds and that future Betfair oppertunities might be good for place beting is not the same as saying I have made incorrect assumptions and statements [needing your correction].

I don't mind being corrected regarding a statement of fact, but not when I have made none!

Changing a writers obvious opinion into "statements" that you need to "correct" say more about the corrector than the writer.

Cheers.

[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-09-11 12:31 ]

[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-09-11 12:46 ]

[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-09-11 13:37 ]