PDA

View Full Version : Cупербол



alex korolev
02-05-2005, 12:20 PM
Кто победит завтра:

New England Patriots или Philadelphia Eagles

Clavelina
02-05-2005, 12:21 PM
А ты что ставки делаешь?

alex korolev
02-05-2005, 12:23 PM
А ты что ставки делаешь?

Делаю

Порyчик
02-05-2005, 12:27 PM
Who do you want to win, Alex?

Clavelina
02-05-2005, 12:27 PM
Делаю

Посмотришь сколько народу проголосовало за одну команду,сколько за другую.И тогда решишь ставку сделать

alex korolev
02-05-2005, 12:52 PM
Who do you want to win, Alex?

Филадельфия

sergey4jc
02-05-2005, 02:14 PM
Кто победит завтра:

New England Patriots или Philadelphia Eagles
Алекс а когда ставки надо будет уже сделать?

MYXOMOP
02-05-2005, 04:18 PM
Филадельфия
.. :priv:

alex korolev
02-05-2005, 07:23 PM
Алекс а когда ставки надо будет уже сделать?

в любое время перед кик-оффом.

чтобы выиграть деньги на Патриотах надо покрыть очки -7.
А если ставишь на Филу, тебе даётся 7 очков, и, скажем, выиграли Патриоты, с разрывом в 6, или меньше очков, ты - выиграл. Например, при финальном счёте 27:21, или 35:30 в пользу Патриотов.

LaFemmeGavrila
02-06-2005, 02:09 AM
Кер, знает, Алекс. Один мой знакомый хоккеист советует болеть за иглз на основании того, что Пэтриотс уже всех за*бали

alex korolev
02-06-2005, 02:27 AM
Кер, знает, Алекс. Один мой знакомый хоккеист советует болеть за иглз на основании того, что Пэтриотс уже всех за*бали

Мне нравится Филиз плюс тачдаун бет. Может даже парлей с андер 47.5 тотал. ИМХО.

Рижанка
02-06-2005, 02:27 AM
А я подошла логически к выбору: я - не патриот, значит, победят eagles. :grum:

LaFemmeGavrila
02-06-2005, 02:44 AM
ХЗ, короче. Непредсказуемо

LaFemmeGavrila
02-07-2005, 01:00 AM
Короче, МакНабб сосал. А я за них болел. жалко, могли выиграть. Кто-нибудь обьяснит мне, нафига они пошли на он-сайд кик?

alex korolev
02-07-2005, 02:53 AM
Мне нравится Филиз плюс тачдаун бет. Может даже парлей с андер 47.5 тотал. ИМХО.

Eagles covered the spread of 7 points, and total score was under 47.5 points. I won this parlay bet! :)

On-side kick is used when the losing team is trying to regain the posession of the ball, and to prevent winning team of kiling the clock, inside the last 2 minutes warning. Chancy, but sometimes it works (about 30-40% times).

LaFemmeGavrila
02-07-2005, 01:29 PM
Алекс, я знаю правила. Вопрос в том, что им on-side kick был нафиг не нужен - при почти 2-х минутах в остатке Patriot simply did not have a chance to take a knee

Монашка
02-07-2005, 01:31 PM
а кто играл? и кто выиграл?

Moonlight Traveler
02-07-2005, 03:39 PM
Алекс, я знаю правила. Вопрос в том, что им on-side kick был нафиг не нужен - при почти 2-х минутах в остатке Patriot simply did not have a chance to take a knee
They probably thought that the probability of recovering the on-side kick was higher than the probability of patriots getting 1st down.

MT

LaFemmeGavrila
02-07-2005, 03:42 PM
they blew it. could win. mcnabb sucked

alex korolev
02-07-2005, 03:47 PM
They probably thought that the probability of recovering the on-side kick was higher than the probability of patriots getting 1st down.

MT

that's it

LaFemmeGavrila
02-07-2005, 05:19 PM
That's very strange. Let's see. They did not get their on-side kick. Pats did not take a knee (naturally - too much time on the clock left). Pats did not score. But Philies had to start from their end zone, right? so, the question stays - wtf did they have to side-kick for?

alex korolev
02-07-2005, 05:39 PM
That's very strange. Let's see. They did not get their on-side kick. Pats did not take a knee (naturally - too much time on the clock left). Pats did not score. But Philies had to start from their end zone, right? so, the question stays - wtf did they have to side-kick for?

TO re-gain possession of the ball.
That (taking over the ball as a result of an on-side kick) would have given them an opportunity to tie or win this game.
Ponyal????

Moonlight Traveler
02-07-2005, 05:57 PM
That's very strange. Let's see. They did not get their on-side kick. Pats did not take a knee (naturally - too much time on the clock left). Pats did not score. But Philies had to start from their end zone, right? so, the question stays - wtf did they have to side-kick for?

Well, the probability is one thing, what actually happens is another :) Yes, they didn't get their on-side kick, but it doesn't change the fact that they didn't like their chances giving the ball to patriots - one 1st down and game over. I am not saying the decision was correct, just guessing why they did it. I too think kicking off would've been better - patriots would've played even more conservatively close to their end zone and eagles would've had a better field position after the punt.

MT

LaFemmeGavrila
02-07-2005, 06:47 PM
exactly my point.

alex korolev
02-07-2005, 07:32 PM
Well, the probability is one thing, what actually happens is another :) Yes, they didn't get their on-side kick, but it doesn't change the fact that they didn't like their chances giving the ball to patriots - one 1st down and game over. I am not saying the decision was correct, just guessing why they did it. I too think kicking off would've been better - patriots would've played even more conservatively close to their end zone and eagles would've had a better field position after the punt.

MT
That's why you have a head coach who makes this type of decisions. And the one Philies got ain't that bad at all, after all - he got them to the Superball. I have not seen the game, but know what happened. They would have killed the clock. Corey Dillon war running very well all night and the Eagles defense was exhausted to stop his run. He would easily had them kill the clock. So, Philies coach had to make this decision, which majority of coaches in the NFL would have made.

смешно
03-17-2005, 11:00 AM
Гаврила, ты явно не разбираешься, COACH sucks. В поражении иглов виноват только тренер.


they blew it. could win. mcnabb sucked