LCS Sweep Curse

[boomboom]

Your main problem here that causes everything you have written to be off-topic is the original poster suggested a curse and only used examples from 2006 on. If there was a curse, the past would have to have ZERO effect on the future possibilities since the curse would alter the future anyway.

The 'rest of you'? There were only a handful of dissenters - the majority of people seem to be able to not make the same assumptive flaw you made, then made again and again.

Guys, if somebody else had posted what houston has posted, you guys wouldn't argue. He brought up some valid points. Watery, you are rambling right now. Houston pointed out some flaws in that argument. Most of the time, past statistical information can show future predictions. (perdictions is the key word). So 50% of Teams who swept the LCS, wins the world series. That kind of put the theory/curse to rest. "based off of Houston Info:

What ever happened to the Red Sox Curse. (curse only exist in immagination)

As for the original poster Dave, I do kind it interesting about the past two seasons. But the Red Sox are just a superior team on paper, and on the field but as ohms said, the series isn't over till one team wins their 4th game.

Watery, and meetthemets, please put houstongm on your ignore list, you are baiting him.

[boomboom]

Do you think that the outcome of the 2006 Tigers facing the 2006 Athletics and the 2006 Cardinals has an impact on the outcome of the 2007 Rockies facing the 2007 Diamondbacks and 2007 Red Sox?


So basically, everything is a curse.


Exactly. There were no mystical forces at work.


"The series is over" isn't an accurate description - because there is a possibility of the Rockies winning. Saying "The Rockies have a low chance of winning" would be a statistically accurate description.


Aha! So that's how the Red Sox won in 2004. Hahaha.

dude, its pointless , just let him argue with himself.

the time and energy wasted is simply not worth it.

You might have not the energy and time for it, but Houston brings up some great points. If you want to debate, debate, leave insults, and sacrastic remarks out. Put him on your ignore list, and don't debate him.

[MeetDaMets]

at some point or other HGM directed the topic into a discussion of why this is occurring.

not i.

[boomboom]

But your responded and parcipated. If you are going to parcipate, then please do so.

[MeetDaMets]

i thought i responded very matter of factly.

its not like i used incendiary phrases like "unless youre in an alternate reality" , or "
how you could you possibly believe that whatever is soo freakin whatever "

if one asks a question and gets an unemotional, objective, matter of fact response,
one should not complain.

It seems to me that some people are trying to treat/speak to HGM in the manner they feel they are being treated/spoken to.
clearly its not being received that way, so
i do feel that its a pointless endeavor regardless of who is involved.
(ie if a guest had made those remarks i would feel exactly the same way)
its only making things worse.

[boomboom]

I am going to temporarely close this thread. I do not want to ban anybody. I do not like baiting, and that is what I am seeing here. Please carry on.

[robinhoodnik]

"The series is over" isn't an accurate description - because there is a possibility of the Rockies winning. Saying "The Rockies have a low chance of winning" would be a statistically accurate description.

Weren't you the poster who decried FRS' picking apart statements some time ago?

[robinhoodnik]

Exactly. There were no mystical forces at work.

For some people it's fun to pretend there is. Like Halloween kinda. No one actually believes that monsters are roaming the hills, but it's fun to pretend.
I think it's more (In Boston's case) a reference point that says "here is where the string of misfortune began" and it was carried over and misnamed a curse.