New Beta Screenshots (2-6-05) Stats, awards, etc.

[ronnyballgame]

Re: New Beta Screenshots (2-6-05) Stats, awards, etc.

I'm more embarassed that the Phillies finished in second than the fact Atlanta is in the cellar.

Philly will be very underrated, just watch beyotch. Braves are overrated so big!

[ronnyballgame]

Re: New Beta Screenshots (2-6-05) Stats, awards, etc.

I'm more embarassed that the Phillies finished in second than the fact Atlanta is in the cellar.

Philly will be very underrated, just watch beyotch. Braves are overrated so big!

[BGarrett7]

Re: New Beta Screenshots (2-6-05) Stats, awards, etc.

Braves are overrated so big!

Yes, just like they were overrated last year.

[BGarrett7]

Re: New Beta Screenshots (2-6-05) Stats, awards, etc.

Braves are overrated so big!

Yes, just like they were overrated last year.

[sostlouis]

Re: New Beta Screenshots (2-6-05) Stats, awards, etc.

Again, as logical as that sounds, it just doesn't work that way. If a team finishes the season at 80-82, then they ended up two games under. If a team finishes the season 100-62, then the finished up 38 games over.

Yes, your method does make sense, but that isn't the way that it is.

Dude, you're totally wrong. 81-81 is .500. 80-82 is 1 game under. 79-83 is 2 games under. 78-84 is 3 games under. 77-85 is 4 games under. 76-86 is 5 games under. And 75-87 is 6 games under. Think of it this way......if a team is 80-81, then they need to win one game to get to .500, thus they are one game under .500. You're adding games to the season. If you say that an 80-82 team is two games under, then you're implying that there is 164 games during the season. Also, if you think that a team that's 80-82 is two games under, then to be one game under, they'd be 81-82. That's 163 games.

[sostlouis]

Re: New Beta Screenshots (2-6-05) Stats, awards, etc.

Again, as logical as that sounds, it just doesn't work that way. If a team finishes the season at 80-82, then they ended up two games under. If a team finishes the season 100-62, then the finished up 38 games over.

Yes, your method does make sense, but that isn't the way that it is.

Dude, you're totally wrong. 81-81 is .500. 80-82 is 1 game under. 79-83 is 2 games under. 78-84 is 3 games under. 77-85 is 4 games under. 76-86 is 5 games under. And 75-87 is 6 games under. Think of it this way......if a team is 80-81, then they need to win one game to get to .500, thus they are one game under .500. You're adding games to the season. If you say that an 80-82 team is two games under, then you're implying that there is 164 games during the season. Also, if you think that a team that's 80-82 is two games under, then to be one game under, they'd be 81-82. That's 163 games.

[BGarrett7]

Re: New Beta Screenshots (2-6-05) Stats, awards, etc.

Dude, you're totally wrong. 81-81 is .500. 80-82 is 1 game under. 79-83 is 2 games under. 78-84 is 3 games under. 77-85 is 4 games under. 76-86 is 5 games under. And 75-87 is 6 games under. Think of it this way......if a team is 80-81, then they need to win one game to get to .500, thus they are one game under .500. You're adding games to the season. If you say that an 80-82 team is two games under, then you're implying that there is 164 games during the season. Also, if you think that a team that's 80-82 is two games under, then to be one game under, they'd be 81-82. That's 163 games.

It doesn't matter how many games have been played or not played, the same rules always apply.

Look, you said it yourself: "if a team is 80-81, then they need to win one game to get to .500," one game under, right? So, if that team loses their last game of the season, how do they magically stay at one game under .500 just because the season is over? Answer: They don't. The team finishes the season two games under .500 at 80-82.

Really, I don't see how some of you aren't grasping this concept. I've stated time and time again that, yes, you do have a point and that it is perfectly logical, but it simply is not the way that it is.

If a team is playing a ten game schedule, and they end up with a record of 3-7, based on your logic, they would be two games under. However, if they played an eleven-game schedule and still had one game remaining, they would instead be four games under? The hell sense does that make?

[BGarrett7]

Re: New Beta Screenshots (2-6-05) Stats, awards, etc.

Dude, you're totally wrong. 81-81 is .500. 80-82 is 1 game under. 79-83 is 2 games under. 78-84 is 3 games under. 77-85 is 4 games under. 76-86 is 5 games under. And 75-87 is 6 games under. Think of it this way......if a team is 80-81, then they need to win one game to get to .500, thus they are one game under .500. You're adding games to the season. If you say that an 80-82 team is two games under, then you're implying that there is 164 games during the season. Also, if you think that a team that's 80-82 is two games under, then to be one game under, they'd be 81-82. That's 163 games.

It doesn't matter how many games have been played or not played, the same rules always apply.

Look, you said it yourself: "if a team is 80-81, then they need to win one game to get to .500," one game under, right? So, if that team loses their last game of the season, how do they magically stay at one game under .500 just because the season is over? Answer: They don't. The team finishes the season two games under .500 at 80-82.

Really, I don't see how some of you aren't grasping this concept. I've stated time and time again that, yes, you do have a point and that it is perfectly logical, but it simply is not the way that it is.

If a team is playing a ten game schedule, and they end up with a record of 3-7, based on your logic, they would be two games under. However, if they played an eleven-game schedule and still had one game remaining, they would instead be four games under? The hell sense does that make?

[K_GUN]

Re: New Beta Screenshots (2-6-05) Stats, awards, etc.

Dude, you're totally wrong. 81-81 is .500. 80-82 is 1 game under. 79-83 is 2 games under. 78-84 is 3 games under. 77-85 is 4 games under. 76-86 is 5 games under. And 75-87 is 6 games under. Think of it this way......if a team is 80-81, then they need to win one game to get to .500, thus they are one game under .500. You're adding games to the season. If you say that an 80-82 team is two games under, then you're implying that there is 164 games during the season. Also, if you think that a team that's 80-82 is two games under, then to be one game under, they'd be 81-82. That's 163 games.

spend less time here & more time in the math book


80-82 is 2 GAMES under .500...see 82-80 = 2...has for a 1000 years

[K_GUN]

Re: New Beta Screenshots (2-6-05) Stats, awards, etc.

Dude, you're totally wrong. 81-81 is .500. 80-82 is 1 game under. 79-83 is 2 games under. 78-84 is 3 games under. 77-85 is 4 games under. 76-86 is 5 games under. And 75-87 is 6 games under. Think of it this way......if a team is 80-81, then they need to win one game to get to .500, thus they are one game under .500. You're adding games to the season. If you say that an 80-82 team is two games under, then you're implying that there is 164 games during the season. Also, if you think that a team that's 80-82 is two games under, then to be one game under, they'd be 81-82. That's 163 games.

spend less time here & more time in the math book


80-82 is 2 GAMES under .500...see 82-80 = 2...has for a 1000 years

[mjb2124]

Re: New Beta Screenshots (2-6-05) Stats, awards, etc.

80-82 is 2 GAMES under .500...see 82-80 = 2...has for a 1000 years

That's correct.

I understand why some are getting confused because they're trying to factor in the 162 game season, but that's irrelevant when trying to determine how far a team is ahead/below .500. Such as saying 80-82 is 1 game under .500 because if that team would've won one of the games they lost, they'd be 81-81 and .500. However, that's not how it goes because you can't factor in the 162 game season.

I'll try to explain. Team A is 80-82. Team A is 2 games under .500 because .500 for Team A would be 80-80. Hence, 2 games under. Team B is 90-72. Team B is 18 games over .500. .500 for Team B is 90-90 or 72-72. Hence, 18 games over.

Probably not a good explanation, but I tried!

[mjb2124]

Re: New Beta Screenshots (2-6-05) Stats, awards, etc.

80-82 is 2 GAMES under .500...see 82-80 = 2...has for a 1000 years

That's correct.

I understand why some are getting confused because they're trying to factor in the 162 game season, but that's irrelevant when trying to determine how far a team is ahead/below .500. Such as saying 80-82 is 1 game under .500 because if that team would've won one of the games they lost, they'd be 81-81 and .500. However, that's not how it goes because you can't factor in the 162 game season.

I'll try to explain. Team A is 80-82. Team A is 2 games under .500 because .500 for Team A would be 80-80. Hence, 2 games under. Team B is 90-72. Team B is 18 games over .500. .500 for Team B is 90-90 or 72-72. Hence, 18 games over.

Probably not a good explanation, but I tried!

[sostlouis]

Re: New Beta Screenshots (2-6-05) Stats, awards, etc.

That's correct.

I understand why some are getting confused because they're trying to factor in the 162 game season, but that's irrelevant when trying to determine how far a team is ahead/below .500. Such as saying 80-82 is 1 game under .500 because if that team would've won one of the games they lost, they'd be 81-81 and .500. However, that's not how it goes because you can't factor in the 162 game season.

I'll try to explain. Team A is 80-82. Team A is 2 games under .500 because .500 for Team A would be 80-80. Hence, 2 games under. Team B is 90-72. Team B is 18 games over .500. .500 for Team B is 90-90 or 72-72. Hence, 18 games over.

Probably not a good explanation, but I tried!

Okay, using your logic, explain to me what a team's record would be if they are one game under .500. Saying that a team is x amount of games below .500 means that team has to win x amount of games to get to .500. 81 is the .500 mark, therefore 80 wins is one game under .500.

[sostlouis]

Re: New Beta Screenshots (2-6-05) Stats, awards, etc.

That's correct.

I understand why some are getting confused because they're trying to factor in the 162 game season, but that's irrelevant when trying to determine how far a team is ahead/below .500. Such as saying 80-82 is 1 game under .500 because if that team would've won one of the games they lost, they'd be 81-81 and .500. However, that's not how it goes because you can't factor in the 162 game season.

I'll try to explain. Team A is 80-82. Team A is 2 games under .500 because .500 for Team A would be 80-80. Hence, 2 games under. Team B is 90-72. Team B is 18 games over .500. .500 for Team B is 90-90 or 72-72. Hence, 18 games over.

Probably not a good explanation, but I tried!

Okay, using your logic, explain to me what a team's record would be if they are one game under .500. Saying that a team is x amount of games below .500 means that team has to win x amount of games to get to .500. 81 is the .500 mark, therefore 80 wins is one game under .500.

[pfunk880]

Re: New Beta Screenshots (2-6-05) Stats, awards, etc.

Okay, using your logic, explain to me what a team's record would be if they are one game under .500.

Not possible at the end of the season. That's just the way it is.

If it's not the end of the season, one game under could be 16-17, 20-21, 80-81, etc.

This discussion has actually been quite humorous to read.

And I completely agree with this comment:

If a team is playing a ten game schedule, and they end up with a record of 3-7, based on your logic, they would be two games under. However, if they played an eleven-game schedule and still had one game remaining, they would instead be four games under? The hell sense does that make?