WAR ROOM LOUNGE V16: Enjambment

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not sure why you're so averse to clarifying your own position here. I'm guessing it's because you don't actually disagree with me but your political tribalism even infects your fight analysis.

I think I've made it quite clear that I disagree with your assessment, and reasoning of what constitutes a "fluke". To agree with you and the reasoning you've given, I'd have to agree that every single outcome of every single fight was a "fluke".
 
Check out all of these independent thinkers:
588459f8f81db918946a48de5c0f842f29e592b83de27d14e8a7bf650ed394d0.jpg

"Now you do what they told ya."
 
I think I've made it quite clear that I disagree with your assessment, and reasoning of what constitutes a "fluke". To agree with you and the reasoning you've given, I'd have to agree that every single outcome of every single fight was a "fluke".

Not unless you deliberately misunderstand. There's a spectrum. GSP vs. Fitch, for example, would probably go the same way 90/100 times. Likewise with Cain vs. Bigfoot. Generally, if someone is a big favorite and is expected to win in a general way and then does, it's less fluky (chance is always a factor, of course). Or if the underdog/favorite shows during the fight that he was underestimated/overestimated, that's less fluky. Unless there's a large, obvious disparity (like the previously mentioned Tyson/Frazier fight), a quick finish is the type that is most likely a fluke. But then you still want to apply some qualitative analysis. And you know that that was a particularly weird finish, comparable IMO to CroCop vs. Barnett I.

And, again, I don't think I'm saying anything you have a substantive disagreement with me, though you might dislike the terminology or just generally be opposed to agreeing with someone who you regard as being in another tribe.
 
Last edited:
And, again, I don't think I'm saying anything you have a substantive disagreement with

Then I must question your ability to read.

though you might dislike the terminology or just generally be opposed to agreeing with someone who you regard as being in another tribe.

No, that's just you looking for a cheap out, because it's unfathomable that anyone disagree with your assessment on...well...anything, but in this case the outcome a fight being a fluke. Something you have to believe so badly, because the fighter who won, is one you unquestionably hate with a burning passion.
 
Then I must question your ability to read.

What do you think we disagree about? Isn't it just what word to apply to a very unlikely to repeat fight outcome?

No, that's just you looking for a cheap out, because it's unfathomable that anyone disagree with your assessment on...well...anything, but in this case the outcome a fight being a fluke. Something you have to believe so badly, because the fighter who won, is one you unquestionably hate with a burning passion.

And now you're falling back into pure adolescent troll mode. All because of a minor semantic difference and your tribalism.
 
What do you think we disagree about? Isn't it just what word to apply to a very unlikely to repeat fight outcome?



And now you're falling back into pure adolescent troll mode. All because of a minor semantic difference and your tribalism.
How sad will you be if Trump wins re-election in 2020?
 
How sad will you be if Trump wins re-election in 2020?

No idea. People generally do a terrible job predicting their emotional reactions. But that would be a bad outcome for those of us who want what is best for the country and the world.

LOL, I was waiting for that signature JVS weasel move, when you can't back your bullshit up.

Yes Jack, everyone who disagrees with you is a troll.

Wait, is it only something I say as a last resort when I can't back my bullshit up or is it something I apply to everyone who disagrees with me? Can't be both.

And are you denying that you're trolling? You know I don't hate Mir, but you think saying it is some kind of attack, and you're mad about the fact that I showed that we don't really disagree on the nature of the Mir/Sylvia fight.
 
No idea. People generally do a terrible job predicting their emotional reactions. But that would be a bad outcome for those of us who want what is best for the country and the world.
lol!
 
You know I don't hate Mir

Nope, can't say that I do, and nothing you have said in the past and present, would convince any rational thinking person otherwise.

Oh', and we clearly disagree on the Mir/Sylvia fight. You claiming that I secretly agree with you, contrary to everything that I've posted is what you would define as "trolling".
 
HW sucks, always has. You guys arguing about the worst division don't have anything better to do? Derrick Lewis is ranked #2 in the world and he has a broken back and zero technique.

Are you guys also fans of women's featherweight?

Bah gawd, king.
Anyone who disagrees with this doesn't know shit about MMA or fighting in general.
 
Nope, can't say that I do, and nothing you have said in the past and present, would convince any rational thinking person otherwise.

Oh', and we clearly disagree on the Mir/Sylvia fight. You claiming that I secretly agree with you, contrary to everything that I've posted is what you would define as "trolling".

I don't claim that you secretly disagree with me. I claim that you openly agree with me on substance. Just don't like the word "fluky," which is fine (I mean, I don't care). And your definition of "hatred" is very odd if you're not trolling.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top