Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Page 2 of 3 pages
You can have your celebrity chefs, I'll Italian grandmas any day of the week for cooking.
Basically every professional, even those who play or played primarily online, comes down for this. Some for profit, others just for fun. When online poker was running in the US, the WSOP was something I did for fun, as I made more money online. Today, I rely on it quite a bit financially.
Vegas doesn't have great local farms, they don't have great local products, wines, beers, liquors, or types of cuisine. Not only do that not have any of that at the "great" level they have virtually none of it all. The amount of ingredients they can get and the depth to those ingredients is far smaller and shallower than virtually any other spot in the country that isn't in a desert.
Did you just take a permanent hit when online poker went down?
Do you get bored playing the same game day-in and day out?
Except Vegas isn't cutting edge. Vegas is trying to clone the experience of other places.
What, you don't have advertisements for prostitutes thrust into your hands every time you walk down the street in your hometown?
Though I do find it funny that Las Vegas is part of the "beauties of the natural world". So thank you for that.
Not only do that not have any of that at the "great" level they have virtually none of it all. The amount of ingredients they can get and the depth to those ingredients is far smaller and shallower than virtually any other spot in the country that isn't in a desert.
Other than Macau, no other place has that type of gambling breadth, depth, and quality
Oh God, yes. Tournament poker is not a reliable or particularly lucrative way to make a living, and live cash games are soft, but so, so, so slow.
An online professional essentially turns himself into a mini-casino. Create a small edge, then ram that edge through an enormous amount of volume. The volume just isn't there live.
My brother went through the same thing, and just quit playing because the money wasn't worth his while.
The only really workable way to approach it is to partner with other professionals and split the buy-ins and payouts. It smooths out the variance and lets you defray some travel/lodging costs.
And all of those ingredients cost a boat load more in Vegas than tehy did in LA or California and thus a lot places won't order as good of a product as they would if they were in LA or they'll pass those cost onto the customers because they know the tourists will pay it.
Over on the NBA thread, I gather that people actually regard him as some sort of authority.
, and he knows a tremendous amount about pro basketball.
His book also shows that he can't distinguish between Mel Daniels & Jim McDaniels.
The Commander's Palace visit would have been about 5 years ago, my last visit to Vegas. The food was bland and I got sick, don't know what to tell you.
o be fair, anyone over the age of 25 who acts like a fratboy should be hit in the face with a shovel.
Not even close, even if you're just trying to be facetious. Mel Daniels was before my time, but I know he was a hell of a player, but he was an ABA guy, not anywhere near as important in basketball history as Ted Williams was in baseball history, and is largely anonymous today even to very knowledgeable fans. Simmons did a lot of research on the book, but he has never sold himself as an historian.
You're conflating your intense dislike for Simmons and his overaged sexist fratboy thing with what he brings to the table in terms of basketball knowledge. Like I said, people react to the schtick in different ways, and there was some stuff in the book that was sexist enough that I (and many other people--several reviewers brought it up) felt that it crossed the line to offensive. But that is a separate issue from what he knows about basketball.
Simmons and his overaged sexist fratboy thing
Yes, adolescence is a ######## modern concept. There wasn't any toleration for that nonsense when you went to work at 15 (my paternal grandfather) or even 12 (my maternal grandmother).
Adolescence is a ######## experience but I wouldn't let my disdain for it color the fact that I'm glad my kids won't have to work in the fields at 12 like my grandparents did. A work ethic is important. Brutal and poorly ocmpensated labor that precludes you from getting an education, not so much.
We have too much tolerance for kids eff-ing around. Especially in college. College should not be a 4-year beach party.
If students are not going to spend 40-60 hours a week on classes and schoolwork, they should just get a job and go to school at night.
To be fair, anyone over the age of 25 who acts like a fratboy should be hit in the face with a shovel.
Believe me, I'm not complaining, just wondering. Adolescence & being some sort of fratboy aren't the same thing, though; I didn't like the latter when I was in college (I might be an atheist/agnostic, but my Southern Baptist upbringing wasn't without its influence, even unto today, & that's not even counting the old doctrinaire punk orientation), either.
he's making money
Simmons wrote a 700-page book on the history of the NBA--greatest teams, players, HOF etc, and he knows a tremendous amount about pro basketball. His schtick/style, to which people have different reactions, doesn't take away from that knowledge base, which is extensive. But he is not really an analyst, as we have said on the thread many times.
I still dress like I did when I was 16. I think I even still have a couple 20 year old t shirts.
Was this mostly an upper-class phenomenon, or widespread?
Were these mostly locals, living close to their families? Or, were they basically plucked out of their normal society and dropped into an urban world, effectively on their own?
So, we can conclude that college kids have always been ass*****?
I know A LOT about political and military history, but the social side is not my bag.
Right, but a seachange is coming. The current system is unsustainable.
Those institutions shouldn't be eligible for Fed aid in the first place. There are not so many colleges that the Feds can't vet them for being real institutions before approving loans.
Yes, that's true. I missed seeing the baby boomer thing up close (my parents are war babies, so just pre-boom, and I'm just post-boom.
My question is really why did the baby boomers act this way (something to do with the '60s and Vietnam I'm sure), but more interestingly, why are subsequent generations following along?
Why haven't the boomers' kids rebelled against their parents an rejected their ideology of perpetual adolescence?
Right, but a seachange is coming. The current system is unsustainable.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (3 members)
Page rendered in 0.7202 seconds, 58 querie(s) executed