ExiledInIllinois Posted March 3 Posted March 3 11 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said: Your Canadian style math assumes games are worth two points but that’s not true. Wins are worth two points but many games carry a three point value. Quote
Doc Posted March 3 Posted March 3 49 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said: How is 31-30 losing? They don't have a 29-32 record because that's only 58 points. They now have 62 points. 4OT/SOL is equal to 4 points. Or two wins. 2 losses when reducing the overall record down to just wins/losses. Do you believe 2+2=5? 1 Quote
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 3 Posted March 3 1 minute ago, Doc said: Do you believe 2+2=5? Do you believe 29x2=62? Two can play the old "3 Sailors on Liberty" get a hotel mathematical conundrum game! 😉😜😘 Quote
Doc Posted March 3 Posted March 3 9 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said: Do you believe 29x2=62? Two can play the old "3 Sailors on Liberty" get a hotel mathematical conundrum game! 😉😜😘 No, it doesn't. But the Sabres also don't have 31 wins, do they? Quote
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 3 Posted March 3 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Doc said: No, it doesn't. But the Sabres also don't have 31 wins, do they? But they have 62 points, not 58. You said their record is: 29-32. They don't have 32 losses. They have 28. OT/SOL are not regulation losses. YET, OT/SO WINS go in win column. Like our benevolent Canadian lover noted. Nice Canadian math. 3 point games, not 2. So, when determining a pure win/loss record, one would think the 4 points would be split. Which... Keep the equation balanced with 62 points. The fair thing to do is call it 31-30. A winning record. And anyway... 29-28-4 IS a winning record! 😆🤣 Edited March 3 by ExiledInIllinois 1 Quote
Doc Posted March 3 Posted March 3 22 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said: But they have 62 points, not 58. You said their record is: 29-32. They don't have 32 losses. They have 28. OT/SOL are not regulation losses. YET, OT/SO WINS go in win column. Like our benevolent Canadian lover noted. Nice Canadian math. 3 point games, not 2. So, when determining a pure win/loss record, one would think the 4 points would be split. Which... Keep the equation balanced with 62 points. The fair thing to do is call it 31-30. A winning record. And anyway... 29-28-4 IS a winning record! 😆🤣 So in the NFL, if you go to OT against a team and lose...it's a win? Is that what you're saying? Quote
Mike in Horseheads Posted March 3 Posted March 3 (edited) 2 hours ago, Doc said: Yes, they have 62 points. But they also have a losing record. Doc.... how can you call 29-28-4 a losing record, sorry I don't agree with your math. They are playing at .508 Edited March 3 by Mike in Horseheads Quote
Doc Posted March 3 Posted March 3 7 minutes ago, Mike in Horseheads said: Doc.... how can you call 29-28-4 a losing record, sorry I don't agree with your math. They are playing at .508 Again, because the "4" refers to overtime losses. Which are separate from the 28 regulation losses. Quote
Mike in Horseheads Posted March 3 Posted March 3 2 minutes ago, Doc said: Again, because the "4" refers to overtime losses. Which are separate from the 28 regulation losses. They have 62 points out of a possible 122= .508 1 Quote
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 3 Posted March 3 21 minutes ago, Doc said: So in the NFL, if you go to OT against a team and lose...it's a win? Is that what you're saying? Sabres are playing @ .508. SOURCE: @Mike in Horseheads 😆 3 minutes ago, Mike in Horseheads said: They have 62 points out of a possible 122= .508 You da man! Quote
Mike in Horseheads Posted March 3 Posted March 3 1 hour ago, Doc said: No, it doesn't. But the Sabres also don't have 31 wins, do they? I wish the NHL had a 3*2*1 pts per game, 3 regulation win/ 2ot wins/ 1 ot losses. BUT, under current rules they are over .500 1 1 Quote
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 3 Posted March 3 7 minutes ago, Doc said: Again, because the "4" refers to overtime losses. Which are separate from the 28 regulation losses. Here has always been my suggestion. All games = 3pts. RegWin=3 RegLoss=Boopkiss OT/SOW=2 OT/SOL=1 2 minutes ago, Mike in Horseheads said: I wish the NHL had a 3*2*1 pts per game, 3 regulation win/ 2ot wins/ 1 ot losses. BUT, under current rules they are over .500 +1. I was typing when you posted! Quote
Mike in Horseheads Posted March 3 Posted March 3 2 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said: Here has always been my suggestion. All games = 3pts. RegWin=3 RegLoss=Boopkiss OT/SOW=2 OT/SOL=1 +1. I was typing when you posted! Quote
4merper4mer Posted March 3 Posted March 3 20 minutes ago, Mike in Horseheads said: Doc.... how can you call 29-28-4 a losing record, sorry I don't agree with your math. They are playing at .508 Canadian math does. 29-28-4 = 62 points I looked it up, the Sabres are 4-0-4 in OT this year so…. Sabres opponents record is 32-25-4 = 68 points We have earned 62 points and our opponents have earned 68. How is that .500? Quote
BADOLBILZ Posted March 3 Posted March 3 9 minutes ago, Mike in Horseheads said: Doc.... how can you call 29-28-4 a losing record, sorry I don't agree with your math. They are playing at .508 No, Doc is correct, 29-32 is a losing record. There aren't any actual tie's in hockey. Loser points aren't half a win they are just a token point to make losing fans feel better about losing late. Quote
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 3 Posted March 3 1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said: No, Doc is correct, 29-32 is a losing record. There aren't any actual tie's in hockey. Loser points aren't half a win they are just a token point to make losing fans feel better about losing late. But they ain't 29-32.😆 They are 29-28-4 with 62 points and and winning % of .508. That's a winning record anywhere! Quote
Process Posted March 4 Posted March 4 4 hours ago, Mike in Horseheads said: Doc.... how can you call 29-28-4 a losing record, sorry I don't agree with your math. They are playing at .508 What does the 4 in that record represent? Quote
Doc Posted March 4 Posted March 4 28 minutes ago, Process said: What does the 4 in that record represent? Losses in OT. Which get a point. Quote
Process Posted March 4 Posted March 4 18 minutes ago, Doc said: Losses in OT. Which get a point. Right. But I wanted him to tell me that. LOSSES. Like you said Sabres are still below .500. Quote
Doc Posted March 4 Posted March 4 9 minutes ago, Process said: Right. But I wanted him to tell me that. LOSSES. Like you said Sabres are still below .500. Sorry, I thought that was directed to me. 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.