Just curious....these results come from one simulated game?
I wonder if there was a best 2 of 3 series in the early rounds if we'd get the same results??
Maybe next year they can do that (or perhaps this summer)...I'll bring the idea up when I speak with them next.
thanks. i've done some monte carlo simulations and one individual simulation can deliver results within a pretty wide range; the reason for multiple simulations is to dampen the influence of outliers.
I'm not really sure exactly what kind of simulator/predictor they are using. That being said, while one simulation can deliver results within a pretty wide range, one game in a one and done format can also deliver results in a pretty wide range.
Yes, of course. However, we have a regular season of 35+ games that "sorts" teams before they are even eligible for the playoffs. The one-and-done format starts only after a considerable number of real-life "simulations" have been run first.
The simulator they are using has all 58 teams in a single-elimination tournament from the outset. I'd suggest a 3 of 5 or a 2 of 3 format until the round of 16 is reached and then switch to the one-and-done so that the results are a bit more congruent with the situation we have now. *
Maybe they meant "happier" than showtunes. Just because the first thing you think of for the word gay is derogatory in nature, doesn't mean everyone else does.Whoever tagged this thread is:
1) A homophone,
2) a hater of showtunes, and
3) wrong.
This is one of exactly 3 threads I've been looking at religiously since Sunday. It's fun. Get over it.
They didn't tag the thread calling it "gay" because they like it. Don't be such an ignorant a s s.Maybe they meant "happier" than showtunes. Just because the first thing you think of for the word gay is derogatory in nature, doesn't mean everyone else does.
Omg we're fighting...In Worcester, Wisconsin and BU are knotted up at 1 through the first period.
Yay for intolerance!They didn't tag the thread calling it "gay" because they like it. Don't be such an ignorant a s s.
Omg we're fighting...
Whoever tagged this thread as "gayer than showtunes" is:
1) A homophobe,
2) a hater of showtunes, and
3) wrong.
This is one of exactly 3 threads I've been looking at religiously since Sunday. It's fun. Get over it.
I don't get it. You object to me taking issue with someone calling something "gay" because they don't like it?Yay for intolerance!
Alright...the Regional Finals are underway!
In Worcester, Wisconsin and BC are knotted up at 1 through the first period.
In St. Paul, the Gophers have a 1-0 lead through 20 minutes.
In Bridgeport, Miami is out to a 2-0 lead, thanks to two late goals at the end of the first.
In Green Bay, Maine and Michigan are all square at 0 after 1.
I don't get it. You object to me taking issue with someone calling something "gay" because they don't like it?
I know what the dictionary definitions of various references to homosexuals are. But, again, and try to keep up, they didn't call it "gay" because they thought the thread was "happy." They called it "gay" because they didn't like it. That turns a word that doesn't have negative connotations by itself into hate speech.Is it "gay" to say that calling something "gay" is a "gay" thing to do? When we sing Deck the Halls at Christmas, can we still "don we now our gay apparel"?
I remember when reading Ivanhoe in high school English literature, there was a sentence in which a poor peasant went into the woods to pick up faggots*, to take them home and burn them in his fireplace!You can imagine the giggles that line brought, and that was several decades ago.
* for those without a handy pocket dictionary, that word in Sir Walter's time meant "kindling."
This feigning ignorance in an attempt to defend homophobia drives me up a ****ing wall. It happens all the time and it is maddening.