John Barton VS Lou Figueroa

JB Cases said:
[...]
2. When I say I will bet $10,000 that x+x=xx
[...]
Click to expand...

Although I don't have that kind of disposable cash to sling around for bets, I'll bet you a smaller amount that the formula you show above, is mathematically wrong. ;)

-Sean
 
sfleinen said:
Although I don't have that kind of disposable cash to sling around for bets, I'll bet you a smaller amount that the formula you show above, is mathematically wrong. ;)

-Sean
Click to expand...

No bet. See I can admit when I am possibly wrong and defer to those who know more than me.

But if you want I will be happy to bet $10,000 that I have been wrong before.

:-)
 
sfleinen said:
Yup, those were the only two values of "x" for which that formula were true, and John should've taken the bet. ;)

See? The bet was not rigged. :p

-Sean
Click to expand...

Can I join the geekfest? I think JB wins this bet, based on the implicit presence of the natural log operator in the following locations:


Ln(xx) = Ln(x) + Ln(x)​


QED.
 
I never thought this thread would go this far....
....now they're fighting with X-handles....:help:
 
SpiderWebComm said:
Yeah...that's why your boy gets lifetime ban hammers from his local poolroom, forget AZB.

You have to be a classy guy to get banned from a POOL HALL.

Charles Manson was never banned from a pool hall.

It's amusing how you follow John around from thread to thread. You act like you wanna *&$!# him or something. Is that why they call you "San Jose" Dick? That's prob where your last crush lived

I bet you wish you were called "Wherever John's at today" Dick.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Thank you for your input Spider... But, I regret that you seem to think I really give a s**t about your juvenile, childish opinion !..You are a John Barton clone, in that you THINK anything you say is relevant TO ANYONE !.. I know you see yourself as a clever, 'pool savvy' individual..This is normal, for anyone who has failed to improve at something they are obsessed with..It is a natural phenomenon !..Charles Manson was never a 'pool groupy', but at least he was good at something !

You, like Barton, are obviously a frustrated individual, who cannot accept the fact that you will never be more than a 'mediocre' pool player (at best).. I cannot help you improve your outlook..... Your personal attacks, without provocation (like Manson did) are meaningless to me...In other words, stick to your pool cartoons, or whatever else you do well...It is as close as you will EVER get, to becoming a pool player !...This is NOT my fault, please man up, and learn to live with it !

SJD
 
Last edited:
Cory in DC said:
Can I join the geekfest? I think JB wins this bet, based on the implicit presence of the natural log operator in the following locations:


Ln(xx) = Ln(x) + Ln(x)​


QED.
Click to expand...

Implicit?!? I'd like to see the "General Rules of Play" on that one. ;) And besides, John already threw in the towel on that one. The bell has rung. :p

On a side note, it's nice to see this thread take a positive spin. :thumbup2:

-Sean
 
BeiberLvr said:
I said 500:1, that's your $500 to my $1

But we're friends, so for you, I'll bring it down to 400 to 1
Click to expand...


I've done the calculation and Johnny 's chances of winning against Lou are identical to the lottery whether he play's or not.
 
Last edited:
sfleinen said:
Joey, I know that you later edited your original post, but by that time two people had already responded and quoted the original text, so I hope you don't mind that I respond in kind? It's in the spirit of good intentions, trust me.



I appreciate that you took time out to respond, Joey. And I feel I owe you an explanation of what I was getting at, based on some things I see in your original text.



That bolded part is one of those things that I wanted to address right out in the open, because primarily, that statement is 100% untrue. I'm not sure if it's because of a point-purpose selective/biased memory, or just forgetting certain instances have happened because the quantity of them may not've met a "critical mass" or threshold for long-term memory.

Fact: Lou and I have had it out here, in the Main forum, and in the 14.1 forum, on numerous occasions. A couple instances that stand out: Lou's deification of Willie Mosconi, Lou's stubborn refusal to admit that Mosconi had a slip stroke (evident to anyone that watches video archives), arguments to what cue ball was used at 14.1 events, Lou's downtrodding write-up of the SBE he attended and the management of the 14.1 Challenge event, and a little instance where Mr. Wilson himself had to warn Lou about some really nasty comments he made to me in response to what I thought were obvious playful ex-Navy guy -to- ex-Air Force guy portrayals of each other's service. (In other words, playful banter that could be heard around any military water cooler, that he took personally.)

Some of the comments put by Lou in my direction were really nasty and over the top. In some of the instances, his point and stance was 100% correct, and if other than for the language used, I would normally concede gracefully.

I once made the analogy that Lou's favorite move / parting shot, is when he feels he wants to put a capper or coup de gras on his point, he turns his back to you, and as he's walking away, he flings a spinning machete over his shoulder, which you find embedded in the crown of your head.

Here's the point I make: so what? Let's capitalize that. SO WHAT?

That's his way. You have your way. I have my way. Everyone has his/her way. Everyone has his/her own idiosyncracies, which they may -- or may not(!) -- know is not everyone else's normal way of dealing with things. Lou may know he's caustic in many instances. But in some ways, so are YOU. And, I admit, I can be caustic at times as well.

I try to be the best human being I can be, while still defending my values. But I find as I get older, countering causticity with more causticity does no one good. In fact, there's a lot of collateral damage when that stuff splashes around.

You can still defend your values and be a good human being at the same time. The trick is to pick your battles. And, when to just close your eyes, and say to yourself, "this ain't worth it," and move on -- even without a reply.

There's too much of this "stake in the ground" nonsense here. And over what -- a freakin' way to aim a pool shot?



Thank you, Joey. That means a lot. This is my point, btw. One can be a great debater in a forum setting without having to resort to that bucket of caustic liquids. I strive to be that way, although I may not always be successful.



One question to you, Joey -- is this all worth it? I mean, you disagree with Lou, Dave (SpiderWebComm) disagrees with Lou, John Barton disagrees with Lou, Stan disagrees with Lou, ...ad nauseam. There are two common denominators in the above:

1. Lou
2. You

(I'm not talking about the others, btw -- only you and your part in all this.) Only *one* of those two common denominators above is one you have control over. Can you guess which one it is?

My point is it should be glaringly obvious by now that you are not going to "change" Lou or his stance on those topics you disagree over (e.g. aiming systems). Yet, you keep on, and on, and on. You (and the others, btw) are like little wind-up or RC toys that, when they meet a wall, instead of changing direction and going around the wall, you instead back up, go forward crashing into the wall, back up, go forward crashing again into the wall, etc., over and over.

It's very easy to point the finger at Lou and blame him for his audacity, causticity, etc. But you know that old saying about when you make a fist and form your hand to point a finger in blame at someone, where are the other three fingers pointing?



I *do* appreciate the follow-up and the time you put into this, Joey, and please understand it's for the purposes of taking the opportunity to address a couple key points that would've otherwise been lost if I'd responded only to the edited version.

While the forums may look to this as a blessing -- culminating in an "Internet Death Match" of the caliber not seen since OMGWTF-vs-Cubc -- you really do have to question the silliness of all this. Only *one* of the two common denominators mentioned a couple paragraphs above needed to exercise a bit of "full stop" control, and things would've been halted in their tracks. Yeah, an Internet Death Match over disagreements about aiming systems. This takes the playground-ish "my Dad is better than your Dad -- wanna fight me and see?" to a new level of silliness.

Still, I count myself as one who wants to see this match, because I LOVE one pocket! Too bad it couldn't be an all-around, with some 14.1 thrown in. That would make it really interesting.

-Sean
Click to expand...




8pack said:
I've done the calculation and Johnny 's chances of winning against Lou are identical to the lottery whether he play's or not.
Click to expand...

8pack: I'll take 50M:1 and take John.

In all seriousness... what kind of odds can I get if I take John? Just curious as to the line. Let me know.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk
 
I have a feeling that JB will be embarrassed and this will be an expensive lesson.

Better him do it than any other person here. Let this be a lesson learned on what not to do.
 
Miller said:
I'll give you 3:1 @ $500
:wink:
Click to expand...

JB must be taking "last gasp" lessons, or he would be all over this Miller !..Actually, I think 5 to 1 would be a safe bet,
but I don't like money odds !..I'd rather make it, John "does not get 4 games", racing to 9.(12th round TKO for Lou) :thumbup:

SJD...Worlds Greatest Pool Handicapper (Not too bad at hockey either, had Canada to win both games.) :D

PS.."Watch your drink Lou"..Desperate people have been known to do desperate things !.. Jes' sayin' ;)
 
Last edited:
SJDinPHX said:
JB must be taking "last gasp" lessons, or he would be all over this Miller !..Actually, I think 5 to 1 would be a safe bet,
but I don't like money odds !..I'd rather make it, John "does not get 4 games", racing to 9.(12th round TKO for Lou) :thumbup:

SJD...Worlds Greatest Pool Handicapper (Not too bad at hockey either, had Canada to win both games.) :D

PS.."Watch your drink Lou"..Desperate people have been known to do desperate things !.. Jes' sayin' ;)
Click to expand...

I thought you meant that Lou shouldn't have any alcohol and play like a paraplegic midget like he did at the DCC. I'll take my 200 to your 1000.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

EDIT: I should say.... "Play like a paraplegic midget and then blame it on alcohol so people would think that's what made him miss straight-ins and constantly shoot the wrong shot."

Oh wait... maybe Lou jarred himself? That's probably what happened. Anyways, here's your chance to scalp this "retard" and get into the pocket of someone who thinks you shouldn't be in ANY hall of fame... other than the "GROPING BAR MAIDS HOF." You couldn't handicap how many Viagras you'd have to snort in order to satisfy one of those poor girls let alone what the real odds are for this match.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top