10-18-2018, 03:40 PM
(10-15-2018, 04:04 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Playing not to lose is smart.
Claiming that you know we would have gotten it is absurd. You have no idea what would have happened.
Ironically winning is the same as not losing except for a tie..Since I know of no coaches nor players who plan to tie games ahead of time I have to assume they all play to not lose. So...to review , winning is not losing unless the winners are all killed soon as the game is over in which case winning is losing. Damned Marvin! He plays to not get killed after the game!
In the immortal words of my old man, "Wait'll you get to be my age!"
Chicago sounds rough to the maker of verse, but the one comfort we have is Cincinnati sounds worse. ~Oliver Wendal Holmes Sr.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
Chicago sounds rough to the maker of verse, but the one comfort we have is Cincinnati sounds worse. ~Oliver Wendal Holmes Sr.
