Bills 24 vs Patriots 25 - Game thread

[Rogah]

There is another possibility and that is simply the fact that I don't know.

If you honestly and seriously do not know whether or not there is legalized wagering on the WWE, then you're just too ignorant to take part in any conversation on this subject matter. It's like you're trying to discuss advanced Calculus when you don't even know your addition tables.

I did not ask you to "name" the laws,

Actually, that's exactly what you ask me to do. Your exact post said (direct quote, your words, post # 516) "Can you name me these federal laws concerning rigged outcomes"

just simply provide some evidence that there are laws in place against such an activity the violation of which can result in prosecution.

I am not going to do that. My statement is so self-evident and so widely accepted as true by anyone with a modicum of knowledge on this subject matter, that I am going to allow the statement to stand on its own.

You're trying one of the oldest tricks in the book of internet debating, and it ain't going to work. You're not actually saying that anything I've said is wrong, you're just trying to give me busy-work to do. Nice try, but it isn't working. Just shows how sad and pathetic your contentions are.

It was 47 points. The outcome of the game resulted in 49. You do the math.

OK, so the small percentage of bettors who wagered on the O/U were indeed affected. Meanwhile, you still haven't given me a single reason why the NFL as a league would actually give a **** which group won and which group lost.

How would you really know? Have you ever actually investigated how much money actually takes place changing hands during a week of football?

I've read countless articles on the subject matter. I've never personally investigated the effects of smoking on my lungs, but I sure do know smoking ain't healthy.

I'd like to see the day a multi-billion dollar industry that is so ingrained in society is simply destroyed. If you think this is ever plausible, you have no clue about the power of money.

You don't even know whether or not WWE wagering is legal in Vegas, but you lecture me on having no clue?

If the NFL got caught rigging outcomes of their own games, they would go the way of Arthur Anderson and Enron. All the money in the world didn't save those entities, did it?

 

[zrinkill]

I cannot believe that this argument is still going on ....

Most ludicrous thing I have seen since the PZ got shut down.

 

[Rogah]

I cannot believe that this argument is still going on ....

Most ludicrous thing I have seen since the PZ got shut down.

So don't read it

I am passing time before I leave for the afternoon. Once I take off for the day, I will not be returning to this thread.

 

[SultanOfSix]

If you honestly and seriously do not know whether or not there is legalized wagering on the WWE, then you're just too ignorant to take part in any conversation on this subject matter. It's like you're trying to discuss advanced Calculus when you don't even know your addition tables.

I'm not the one who associated the WWE with legalized gambling. You're the one who did. I merely asked whether these same laws that apply to the NFL about rigged outcomes that you have claimed to exist also apply to the WWE.

I am not going to do that. My statement is so self-evident and so widely accepted as true by anyone with a modicum of knowledge on this subject matter, that I am going to allow the statement to stand on its own.

It's nowhere near as "self-evident" as murder and rape laws, and that was your implication.

OK, so the small percentage of bettors who wagered on the O/U were indeed affected.

Why is it such a small percentage? Isn't betting on the spread just as commonplace as betting on the over/under?

I've read countless articles on the subject matter. I've never personally investigated the effects of smoking on my lungs, but I sure do know smoking ain't healthy.

So you know how much money actually changes hands due to legalized gambling during an NFL week?

You don't even know whether or not WWE wagering is legal in Vegas, but you lecture me on having no clue?

If the NFL got caught rigging outcomes of their own games, they would go the way of Arthur Anderson and Enron. All the money in the world didn't save those entities, did it?

The NFL is essentially a monopoly. It has a special status in this society. It's not analogous to an Enron or and Arthur Anderson.

Like I said, you've made the assumption that I believe that the entire NFL is rigged, or that all, or even a majority of games are fixed. No way.

I'm a fan. I'd rather it not be. But, something just doesn't sit right with me anymore.

 

[Rogah]

I'm not the one who associated the WWE with legalized gambling. You're the one who did. I merely asked whether these same laws that apply to the NFL about rigged outcomes that you have claimed to exist also apply to the WWE.

Actually, you're the one who brought the WWE into this conversation. It's hilarious how you don't even remember your own statements..!!

"Can you name me these federal laws concerning rigged outcomes?" - SoS, post 516

"I did not ask you to "name" the laws" - SoS, post 520

It's nowhere near as "self-evident" as murder and rape laws, and that was your implication.

It is to anyone who has the first clue how the gambling industry works, which you clearly do not.

Why is it such a small percentage? Isn't betting on the spread just as commonplace as betting on the over/under?

Betting on the over/under is not as commonplace as betting on the game against the spread. Gamblers in general as a group do not bet as heavily on the O/U as they do on the pointspread.

So you know how much money actually changes hands due to legalized gambling during an NFL week?

Yes I do. And if you want to know that answer for yourself, here's a good reference tool you can use to do some research:

www.google.com

The NFL is a monopoly. It has a special status in this society. It's not analogous to an Enron or and Arthur Anderson.

That just reinforces the point I am making because monopolies are subject to even more stringent and strict laws regarding how they operate.

Like I said, you've made the assumption that I believe that the entire NFL is rigged, or that all, or even a majority of games are fixed. No way.

I have made no assumptions whatsoever. I have just responded to the statements you have made. And quite honestly, it seems I am doing a better job of remember your own statements than you are. :laugh2:

 

[SultanOfSix]

Actually, you're the one who brought the WWE into this conversation. It's hilarious how you don't even remember your own statements..!!

I did. But, not in the context of "legalized gambling". That is what you did. I brought up the WWE in the context of sports "entertainment" and rigging games. You diverted the issue to legalized gambling with respect to the WWE. Legalized gambling provides a motivation for determining some outcomes, but it is not the single motivating factor for it. There can be others.

"Can you name me these federal laws concerning rigged outcomes?" - SoS, post 516

"I did not ask you to "name" the laws" - SoS, post 520

My implication was never to actually "name" the specific laws, just like I would never have expected you to "name" specific laws concerning murder or rape. I merely asked you to provide some evidence for them which you didn't do.

It is to anyone who has the first clue how the gambling industry works, which you clearly do not.

Betting on the over/under is not as commonplace as betting on the game against the spread. Gamblers in general as a group do not bet as heavily on the O/U as they do on the pointspread.

But, they do gamble on them right? So, some people actually could have won or lost money on the fact that they covered the over/under right? You implied that people only bet on the spread and no one really lost any money on the game otherwise. That was untrue. Apparently, I'm not the only one who doesn't have a clue about how the gambling industry works.

That just reinforces the point I am making because monopolies are subject to even more stringent and strict laws regarding how they operate.
I have made no assumptions whatsoever. I have just responded to the statements you have made. And quite honestly, it seems I am doing a better job of remember your own statements than you are. :laugh2:

Maybe. And maybe they're also more viable to corruption and cover ups because of how ingrained in society there are and how much money is involved in them.

I have made no assumptions whatsoever. I have just responded to the statements you have made. And quite honestly, it seems I am doing a better job of remember your own statements than you are.

Yes you have. No one believes all outcomes are rigged, but there are those who do believe that games are called in ways so that certain teams get benefits due to the outcomes can happen.

I can reference google too and point you to all the people who have their reasons on why the believe these activities can occur.

 

[Rogah]

My implication was never to actually "name" the specific laws,

Ah, so when you said "Can you name the laws concerning rigged outcomes?" (direct quote, your words) you didn't really mean I should "name" them, you just meant I should... should... whuh..?

just like I would never have expected you to "name" specific laws concerning murder or rape. I merely asked you to provide some evidence for them which you didn't do.

It is hilarious when people like you make a blunder and instead of just admitting the mistake, like that would kill you or something, you just make yourself look more and more foolish by refusing to admit you goofed.

"Can you name me these federal laws concerning rigged outcomes?" - SoS, post 516

"I did not ask you to "name" the laws" - SoS, post 520

:laugh2: