kosar said:
ok Bernie..but you are the one responding to his thread whereas I would bet he has never responded to one of yours..but he is the clown... :mj07:
My Biggest NBA Bet Ever!
- Thread starter Scott4USC
- Start date
ok Bernie..but you are the one responding to his thread whereas I would bet he has never responded to one of yours..but he is the clown... :mj07:
KilgoreTrout said:
Ummm, ok trout. I'm the clown because I responded to this thread. You wouldn't happen to be 'close' to ScottUSC, would ya? Huh, Casper?
I took $500-$1000 startup $$$ and turned it into $36,000. I have won prob. around $50,000 and lost about $14,000. This is all over 3 years. Bets I make on an everyday basis are between $10-$200. It works for me. Its not money management. I don't care. It works for me. I know I can win everytime and Celtics series was great example. Luckily I was able to buy most if back but when you make series or future bets they "often" give you many chances to middle or cut your losses.
I agree money management is the best thing to do but that is not my style.
As for me posting my $$$ amounts. Why is that an issue? That is how much I wager. I usually only post my big wagers. If you notice I do not post picks on an everyday basis. I only post my "BIG" bets because I win those at an incredible %. Therefore I know I am helping others at this site who follow my picks. In addition, I post detailed analysis explaining why I like the pick. If you don't like me posting my wager amounts, simply don't open my thread! Not hard to do.
I agree money management is the best thing to do but that is not my style.
As for me posting my $$$ amounts. Why is that an issue? That is how much I wager. I usually only post my big wagers. If you notice I do not post picks on an everyday basis. I only post my "BIG" bets because I win those at an incredible %. Therefore I know I am helping others at this site who follow my picks. In addition, I post detailed analysis explaining why I like the pick. If you don't like me posting my wager amounts, simply don't open my thread! Not hard to do.
I am surprised Kosar chose to participate in this thread and comment on me. Kosar you don't want to get into another debate with me! :nono: He knows this will happen! :mj07:
Link to "documented" Post
After people read this post, your poltical mythology will be considered inane.
You seem to think only Bush wanted to oust Saddam. There were many Demon-crats that hopped on board. Here?s a list of prominent Demon-crats & what they said from Clinton to sen john kerry leading up to the war in early ?03!!!!! ( I can?t give a more eloquent reason for the Iraq war than kerry?s speech )
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten time since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18,1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry( D - MA), and others Oct. 9,1998
"Hussein has .. chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." >- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" - Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members.. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real" - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Anyone who can read & comprehend can clearly see that these Demon-crats felt that WMD?s were real & the threat of Saddam was real, which had to be dealt with swiftly & with force if necessary.
*******************************
WHY NOT???
Are you some Middle East expert that you can confidently say with certainty that Iraq will never be a peaceful, democratic country. I think you wish it doesn?t happen, so Bush won?t have the legacy of creating lasting peace in the Middle East, & win a Nobel prize in the process.
So what!!! They supported the legislation, they also take responsibility for it. Although I have no problem with it.
If the UN felt there were no WMD?s, then why did the UN Security Counsil pass Resolution 1441 just before the war???
Read highlighted excerpt:
Resolution 1441 (2002)
Adopted by the Security Council at its 4644th meeting, on
8 November 2002
The Security Council,
Recognizing the threat Iraq?s non-compliance with Council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security,
*************
LA Times article : UN demands that Iraq disarm just prior to the war. Why do this if the UN said there were no WMD's???
Obviously, the UN thought they were there, like the DEMS & BUSH.
The destruction of the missiles has become a crucial test case of Iraq's compliance with U.N. demands that it disarm. If Iraq misses the Saturday deadline to begin the process, Blix could make an emergency report to the Security Council that could lead them to find Iraq in "material breach" of the resolution mandating Baghdad's disarmament. That finding could trigger military action.
It sure seems you are ignoring the ?93 WTC bombing, US embassy bombings, & the bombing of the USS Cole, much like Clinton did, which escalated to 9/11 without the ?proper response? from Clinton.
Alright, the USS Cole did not sink, but was severely damaged with 17 sailors killed and 39 injured.. I guess that?s not enough for you liberals to take notice.
I believe the DEM quotes above should satisfy any liberal about the threat Saddam imposed.The Bush response was appropriate and with the necessary increased security measures required by the circumstances and fully endorsed by the Demon-crats, just maybe that?s the reason there are no more US attacks. I have no idea what Gore would have done (probably nothing), but I?ll take my chances with Bush anyday.
VIVA BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!
:clap: :clap: :clap:
Now that I disposed of Kosar are their any other challengers? :142lmao:
*just wanted to make sure Kosar gets another good look at this masterpiece!!!!
Link to "documented" Post
kosar said:
After people read this post, your poltical mythology will be considered inane.
kosar said:
You seem to think only Bush wanted to oust Saddam. There were many Demon-crats that hopped on board. Here?s a list of prominent Demon-crats & what they said from Clinton to sen john kerry leading up to the war in early ?03!!!!! ( I can?t give a more eloquent reason for the Iraq war than kerry?s speech )
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten time since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18,1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry( D - MA), and others Oct. 9,1998
"Hussein has .. chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." >- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" - Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members.. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real" - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Anyone who can read & comprehend can clearly see that these Demon-crats felt that WMD?s were real & the threat of Saddam was real, which had to be dealt with swiftly & with force if necessary.
*******************************
kosar said:
WHY NOT???
Are you some Middle East expert that you can confidently say with certainty that Iraq will never be a peaceful, democratic country. I think you wish it doesn?t happen, so Bush won?t have the legacy of creating lasting peace in the Middle East, & win a Nobel prize in the process.
kosar said:
So what!!! They supported the legislation, they also take responsibility for it. Although I have no problem with it.
kosar said:
If the UN felt there were no WMD?s, then why did the UN Security Counsil pass Resolution 1441 just before the war???
Read highlighted excerpt:
Resolution 1441 (2002)
Adopted by the Security Council at its 4644th meeting, on
8 November 2002
The Security Council,
Recognizing the threat Iraq?s non-compliance with Council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security,
*************
LA Times article : UN demands that Iraq disarm just prior to the war. Why do this if the UN said there were no WMD's???
Obviously, the UN thought they were there, like the DEMS & BUSH.
The destruction of the missiles has become a crucial test case of Iraq's compliance with U.N. demands that it disarm. If Iraq misses the Saturday deadline to begin the process, Blix could make an emergency report to the Security Council that could lead them to find Iraq in "material breach" of the resolution mandating Baghdad's disarmament. That finding could trigger military action.
kosar said:
It sure seems you are ignoring the ?93 WTC bombing, US embassy bombings, & the bombing of the USS Cole, much like Clinton did, which escalated to 9/11 without the ?proper response? from Clinton.
kosar said:
Alright, the USS Cole did not sink, but was severely damaged with 17 sailors killed and 39 injured.. I guess that?s not enough for you liberals to take notice.
kosar said:
I believe the DEM quotes above should satisfy any liberal about the threat Saddam imposed.The Bush response was appropriate and with the necessary increased security measures required by the circumstances and fully endorsed by the Demon-crats, just maybe that?s the reason there are no more US attacks. I have no idea what Gore would have done (probably nothing), but I?ll take my chances with Bush anyday.
VIVA BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!
:clap: :clap: :clap:
Now that I disposed of Kosar are their any other challengers? :142lmao:
*just wanted to make sure Kosar gets another good look at this masterpiece!!!!
Last edited:
I, and many others, have been right about everything so far, Scott. What's your point?
Just because you use colors in your posts doesn't change the fact that they're idiotic.
Just because you use colors in your posts doesn't change the fact that they're idiotic.
kosar said:
I guess posting winners along with detailed analysis is idiotic. I will take my winnings over the last 3 years on all my posted picks. Again, if you don't like my handicapping, betting style, or $$$ amounts, then you have the option of not opening up my thread. Good luck on all your wagers!
.................................................................Nikos the greek said:
These are the people that deserve to be aware of the huge bets.
The people with few posts that feel like they are living your bets with you.
These are the people that would put down more money than they could afford and may not have the opportunity to hedge out after the game and only lose a repectable 2,500.
kosar - thanks for coming in even though you get blasted for saying the right things. :mj07:
I think this thread deserves a poll.
It could be simple but complicated and may give us the answers we are searching for.
It could be simple but complicated and may give us the answers we are searching for.
Scott-Atlanta said:
Well if these same people trust me and bet with me, they be already up HUGE $$$ with all my other winners posted. I only talk about the wins/losses that I have posted on MJ's. That is what I mean when its all documented.
Besided, I didn't just post my bet and $$$ amount. I gave an extremely detailed analysis why I liked Boston. They had more than enough info to bet with me or fade me.
I also talked about HEDGING or buying back my bet MULTIPLE times in the thread.
Everything I did I posted. No surprises. Nothing fishy. Everything documented!
In the end, I apologize for anybody who lost on my post. I never said I win all my big bets. But I do win most of them! I even said that I am pushing it since I have won ton of $$$ the last 60 days (all posted plays).
Keep trying to take down my integrity and I will keep making you look foolish! I am getting a big kick out of this and you are just feeding my ego! I enjoy tearing posters apart who attempt to attack me.
If we all got along, then the forums would be barren of good reading material...C'mon now, everyone's got the balls the size of Utah when it comes to talking trash in front of a computer, but I've got a gut feeling most would not dare if it were face to face...
Chopsticks said:
I was thinking about going to the MJ superbowl party this last Super Bowl but I am afraid that a lot of these posters who hate me will do something to me. Not worth the risk. If these people hate me or have a problem with me, why don't they ignore my thread? I don't go into there threads. They mean nothing to me and most of them I look down upon.
You would think if they were going to make all these accusations they would have some data to support the accusations. They have NOTHING! Simply put, they are jealous and upset that I did not lose $10,012.
Scott4USC said:
Yes, every year one or two posters get poisoned at the party. It's not really publicized, but it happens. Wierdo.
Last edited:
.......................................................................kosar said:
I think we lost Chanman after last years party. But I think he may have drank a wee bit too much and got 86 d.
.............................................................Scott4USC said:
Scott
No one hates you that much. I guess paranoia carrys over from the computer into real life.
Scott4USC said:
You have no worries Scott
Eddy is another story. I think the line would go around the block.
And those would be people from Cinci alone :mj07:
