Boy, there's a whole lotta stupid in that post. Way too much for me to dissect, but I do like this steaming turd.
"I am thinking the OP is not showing too much responsibility for his own part of this non-win. Did he not see any reason to try to make sure he could at least contact Appleton to help make sure he showed up on time for each match?"
...Yes, you're right...it's obviously my fault for not waking Darren up. I owe him an apology....sorry, pal.
No, you owe yourself an apology for being not looking after your own interests. But don't wise up on my account, go your own way as I am sure you will.
Or this bit of wisdom...
"...is a statistical sure loss for any backer in the short run."
...I'll just let you stew on that for awhile.
No need for me to stew... the stats are easy to figure even using plain arithmetic adding and subtracting. In the short term, paying off after every set, a backer on the 50% win-100% loss payout plan who has 7 barrels $1000 each has to win 5 of 7 sets just to make only $500 profit for the $7k he put at risk - who likes those odds? Risk $7k to win $500? The player would love it, if he were paid by the set, since he pockets $2500 for winning the 5 of 7 sets. And at 4 wins 2 losses, the backer wins zero, the player two grand. Backers will avoid by-the-set payoffs to their player, if they have any experience, or any sense.
Percentages are better (but not a lot) when the player/backer share all up, and each gets half any winnings after expenses. The backer still puts all his money at risk for a potential loss of all of it, and no risk to the player, which is why backer dumping became such a risk, given the not-so-honest history of pool gambling.
The backer takes the risk to win only what the opponent is willing to lose, hoping it will be a lot more than his own bankroll. It is that chance of easily rolling over some semi-amateur or better yet some flush go-off artist that keeps backers returning... in other words, a lot closer to being lock artists than true gamblers.
And who the fu$k is Woodson? Since you repeated this name four times, I'm assuming this isn't a mere typo, but you are actually hearing someone say "Woodson".
Are you really asking who I meant when I mis-typed Woodson for Woodward several times? I doubt it - this looks like another weak AZB personal attack. Yes, I got a name wrong in my fingers and never noticed it. Some other poster said woodson in an earlier thread. You can go back and call them on it also, but I doubt you will, seeing as how this comment was meant as a personal attack, and not meant as your truly misunderstanding who was being talked about.
Just one final question....were you born this way? or is this the result of a lot of glue huffing in your early years? Btw, I'm being very sincere.
Ho hum, another guy who with multiple weak attempts at personal attacks, who knows why... AZB at its best.