The War Room Bet Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jack V Savage said:
That's much less ballsy and less generous, but in the spirit of the original discussion. I'm OK with it, though. Can we add "there is no pending or concluded vote on authorization for military action?"
Click to expand...

I felt like I must've be understanding it wrong cause it would've been a 18 point swing to get what I thought he meant
 
Lead said:
Okay. Sorry about all this. I rather have all this in the front end then disputes on the back end. I get what you mean now
Click to expand...

I interpreted it the same way when he offered it. That it meant +10%, not 10 additional percentage points. But, again, I interpreted that as him making a crazy offer with no chance to win. His clarification is more sporting and in keeping with the discussion that the offer came out of so I accept it as a simple miscommunication and still accept his offer (and still feel confident about a win).
 
Jack V Savage said:
I interpreted it the same way when he offered it. That it meant +10%, not 10 additional percentage points. But, again, I interpreted that as him making a crazy offer with no chance to win. His clarification is more sporting and in keeping with the discussion that the offer came out of so I accept it as a simple miscommunication and still accept his offer (and still feel confident about a win).
Click to expand...

Its definitely a more entertaining bet compared to some that were obvious fails. All the war clause stuff made me realize with the GOP White House, we could be getting way more involved in the Middle East again. I do think Trump has some weird internal conflict about being an isolationist or a international strong man
 
Jack V Savage said:
That's much less ballsy and less generous, but in the spirit of the original discussion. I'm OK with it, though. Can we add "there is no pending or concluded vote on authorization for military action?"
Click to expand...

I'm ok with all of that.
 
Cubo de Sangre said:
Nothin'. Just curious.
Click to expand...

I explained the general guidelines on it a few posts above. Since few bets were done you can clearly see why amerikurana got the top spot as he had the longest duration bet I believe
 
Lead said:
I explained the general guidelines on it a few posts above. Since few bets were done you can clearly see why amerikurana got the top spot as he had the longest duration bet I believe
Click to expand...

Looks like we're agreed, right? On the board?
 
BWW_sports_ITS_ON_MMA.png


@Jack V Savage vs. @drstrangelov
1. Trump's favorability rating Real Clear Politics average is 51.8 before Labor Day
2. drstanglov- For, Jack V Savage- against
3. 09/04/2017 (Labor Day)
4. Hybrid- Jack's avatar or Drstranglovs sig
5. 1 month (tentatively 09/04/17-10/03/17)
6. Attempted or successful assassination of Trump or attack by foreign government or there is pending or concluded vote on authorization for military action before his rating goes up, the bet is null


Good job guys
 
I'd also like to mentioned for the ranking guidelines something that hasn't mattered until recently but challenging someone with a good record is beneficial if you win and null if you lose. There is no negative affect on challenging new bettors or poor record members however, just no additional reward beyond the regular bet.
 
Lead said:
I'd also like to mentioned for the ranking guidelines something that hasn't mattered until recently but challenging someone with a good record is beneficial if you win and null if you lose. There is no negative affect on challenging new bettors or poor record members however, just no additional reward beyond the regular bet.
Click to expand...

So like an Elo-type system is getting set up?
 
Jack V Savage said:
So like an Elo-type system is getting set up?
Click to expand...

I scanned through that and I guess it could be that. It doesn't really penalize the high record people, just allows new guys to jump in and possibly get in the rankings faster than it would normally take. Established people just wouldn't be getting in on the bonus if it were against a new person. With you and strangelovs bet, I looked and his reward would be around what yours would be despite the av/sig discrepancy . Doesn't really leave too much of a mark but hopefully will encourage people to bet more when they see the rankings cause they will possibly want to go after the top guys to help pull themselves up.
 
Jack V Savage said:
@Lead

Reposted from another thread:



You don't know what you think?



Sounds good. I'll repost this in the bet thread.
Click to expand...

I might just be tired but I have no idea what this is in reference to though so I can't format it yet

Edit: is this the voter fraud thing too?
 
Last edited:
Lead said:
I might just be tired but I have no idea what this is in reference to though so I can't format it yet

Edit: is this the voter fraud thing too?
Click to expand...

Yes, voter fraud. My claim is that a thorough investigation will find less than 3,000 non-citizen voters and @HereticBD claims that they'll find more. Note that Trump is claiming 3 *million*.
 
11_others said:
@kpt018
My wager:
Investigation into illegal votes for 2016 Presidential election uncovers at least 100,000 illegal votes.

If I win, you get to have this avatar for 1 month:

74983_1719475314933434_5653167305283569411_n-jpg.73922

Click to expand...
If it wasn't for the fact that you're a one month old account with double yellows, I'd take this bet in a heartbeat.
 
Jack V Savage said:
Yes, voter fraud. My claim is that a thorough investigation will find less than 3,000 non-citizen voters and @HereticBD claims that they'll find more. Note that Trump is claiming 3 *million*.
Click to expand...

That can be the premise of the bet.

However, I need some details on when we know. Are we going to have a deadline for when this "report" comes out. What agency are we going to go off of? If the investigation is closed without a number being disclosed, is the bet simply null?
 
Lead said:
That can be the premise of the bet.

However, I need some details on when we know. Are we going to have a deadline for when this "report" comes out. What agency are we going to go off of? If the investigation is closed without a number being disclosed, is the bet simply null?
Click to expand...

If and when the matter is investigated by whatever gov't body handles the investigation, my claim is that they'll find fewer than 3,000 unauthorized citizen votes in 2016. If no information comes in to confirm or refute that, the bet can't close.
 
Lead said:
That can be the premise of the bet.

However, I need some details on when we know. Are we going to have a deadline for when this "report" comes out. What agency are we going to go off of? If the investigation is closed without a number being disclosed, is the bet simply null?
Click to expand...

Whenever, or if ever, we find out what the "official" investigation found. Whatever gets reported by the White House/Group appointed by White House at the end of the investigation, is what I'm going by. If no numbers are officially disclosed, then yeah, the bet is off. Now, if official numbers are found and confirmed by internet sleuths, I would be fine with going by that as well as long as the evidence was convincing.

The deadline is indefinite.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,943
Messages
58,329,845
Members
176,001
Latest member
batty

Share this page

Back
Top