The Weekly Chat Accumulator 21/22

[dazzy_deff]

1 minute ago, rocket_scientist said:

No, you're getting twisted again. My pick did not cost the sixfold. It needs ALL SIX to land you stupid petty childish moron. 

I was replying to your hypothetical scenario where you referenced if Portsmouth had scored their penalty. You petty childish moron. 

 

6 minutes ago, rocket_scientist said:

I got paid over £60 so it was a winning pick and 2 x winning doubles (as I had the "incorrect prediction" on both).

You're making yourself look petty and vindictive. I don't know the history but it's safe to assume that tdd does and I'm happy to stand down if he says. If the late pen in the real incorrect prediction had been scored, you would've got paid because my selection won, and was actually the first to come in, one of three that was already done and dusted by HT. 

 

[Poodler]

This wouldn’t happen in the DWT

[dazzy_deff]

1 minute ago, rocket_scientist said:

You're so thick you don't know how stupid you paint yourself. "Most weeks" the acca didn't keep the person for the next week you said. That's plucked out of your arse, that teams went two up, early pay out and then the other team conceded two or more to level or win. It happens most weeks on the hundreds of games we can bet on (that early pay outs benefit the punter). Name once when the early pay out benefited the acca winning when it wouldn't otherwise have?

I dont have a spreadsheet to consult. What I will say is...its hardly surprising this whole thread turns to a farce as soon as you stick your bulbous beak in. 

[dazzy_deff]

Just now, rocket_scientist said:

And you failed to add in that it wasn't my pick that cost the acca, moron, because you were being petty and childish. 

It was your pick and Portsmouth that cost the acca with any bookmaker that didnt offer early payout. 

[Parklife]

How do I add myself to the waiting list for the next available spot? 

[Henry]

Once @thedandydon logs on, you'll join the bottom of the list underneath @rocket_scientist

[The Buzzard]

19 minutes ago, dazzy_deff said:

Put it this way...if Portsmouth had won, Id have won the coupon, thanks to the early payout feature.

However, Buzzard, may use Skybet and would have lost the accumulator. 

The title is Weekly Chat Accumulator - nae the Weekly Bet365 accumulator. 

The Acca lost as far as my betting slip goes. I don't use Bet365 and take part in this for a bit of camaraderie with the other players and what comes in at the end of 90 minutes in each game. If it's up at the end of the 90s then superb. If it's not then I'll shrug my shoulders and say, 'fuck it. Unlucky/shambles.'
To the best of my recollection there hasn't been a previous instance where someone has claimed a successful pick on a match result before the final score was known. The only ones we have ever considered as landing before 90 minutes end have involved over x amount of goals in match or btts. 
That being the case I consider the players that never had the stated outcome of the match as giving up their places to the next guys on the list. 

[dazzy_deff]

5 minutes ago, The Buzzard said:

The Acca lost as far as my betting slip goes. I don't use Bet365 and take part in this for a bit of camaraderie with the other players and what comes in at the end of 90 minutes in each game. If it's up at the end of the 90s then superb. If it's not then I'll shrug my shoulders and say, 'fuck it. Unlucky/shambles.'
To the best of my recollection there hasn't been a previous instance where someone has claimed a successful pick on a match result before the final score was known. The only ones we have ever considered as landing before 90 minutes end have involved over x amount of goals in match or btts. 
That being the case I consider the players that never had the stated outcome of the match as giving up their places to the next guys on the list. 

As it should be. 

[Studebaker-90]

5 hours ago, Sooper-hanz said:

What’s the odds of you removing your tongue from his arsehole ? 5000/1?  

Around the same as you posting something worthwhile or even slightly humorous 

[The Boofon]

If I pick a team and it’s the only one that lets the acca down do I stay in for next week through the William Hill acca insurance whereby if you fall one game short you get your stake back?

[Henry]

For me, we need a vote of the current acca membership (at 3pm Saturday 21st) on the issue, if dandydon doesn’t clarify shortly. 

[dazzy_deff]

35 minutes ago, rocket_scientist said:

It's not a farce. If I had been the administrator, I would have thought it right to keep in a winning pick. Others don't agree, that's fine. The farce isn't just that there is a failure of set rules and/or precedents, it's you jumping in with fuck off, having changed your tune from Saturday afternoon, for reasons that may or may not be childish, personal and vindictive and which may or may not be inspired by you being a sheep and following a lead to give you the opportunity to feed your obsession, the one you felt you needed to come on here to scratch the itch on the night after your child was born.

What is a farce is you getting so upset (again) that you suspend judgements and critical thinking based on the personal. How dumb is that? Would you have called for me to stand down if the acca had won, if the only pick that failed to "pay out", Portsmouth had won? Would you have asked another poster to step down, one of your mates perhaps, if his pick had landed by early pay out? Do you go through a winning acca looking for early pay outs where the pick got pulled back in 90 minutes?

Of course you wouldn't.

The farce is you not thinking through the consequences. There are no rules and you plucked out "most weeks" out of your arse. It is therefore it is for the administrator to decide. Personally I think it's poor to bin somebody to the bench for an automatic pay out but I know that most people are morons and I accept that most don't take it seriously so either we educate them to punt with better terms (by acknowledging the benefit of them, which will come to all in a year or two anyway) or you have to think through it and bin somebody from a winning acca if this previously-unforeseen event happens again.

You constantly seem to bring up the fact that i was online the day after my child was born. My wife and child were in hospital for 3 days after she was born. Due to covid i was only allowed in for 2 hours a day, for those 3 days. What was i going to fill my other 22 hours with?

Could have spent it wanking over pics of your daughter i suppose...

[The Buzzard]

26 minutes ago, rocket_scientist said:

Your bet came in by HT. I am not a fan of btts nor how many goals over or under as you know but these are often determined well before the end.

As dd's pick fucked Saturday's acca, my pick was irrelevant but I said it was irrelevant -because it had already won - DURING the game, as studebaker AND dd also supported at the time.

This gives the acca an opportunity to think through what should be the way forward. Do we bin somebody from a winning acca cos their auto pay out team didn't go on to win? It doesn't matter a fuck if the early pay out was one of two, three or five winning picks, it is the principle of what we should do with it that matters, what the policy should be, something none of us has anticipated before. I genuinely don't care for MY punting purposes. It's what is the best way to manage this so everyone knows in the future because some of the mutants seem to think they're qualified to be judge and jury, not having the grace to express opinions properly..

I'll jump back on later and see what developments have occurred. I have given my view on how I've always understood the Acca to operate. 
I know it is stating the obvious but I just want to pick a game that at the end of the day doesn't let my other 5 teammates down and helps the guys that bet on it to share in a win. Maybe your suggested approach will come into play. Regardless I'll just carry on making my picks when required. 
 

[The Boofon]

15 minutes ago, rocket_scientist said:

Very good post. There are numerous punter incentives and benefits available as various sites seek to attract the morons to part with their cash, and they do as they successfully profit EVERY single year.

Again though, this circumstance gives the acca the opportunity to make a decision. I am wondering if it might be easiest to go with 90 minutes now so that I go to the bench with dd but this was not what three of us - including the committee man who since changed his tune - were considering during the game when we were waiting on one team to score.

It would be spastic to drop someone from a winning acca though (in my opinion), if the sixfold was saved by an early pay out but because there are so many different betting outlets with different rules etc., it probably is easiest to go on 90 minutes even though it seems crazy to me having won both doubles on Saturday that anyone would not take advantage of free punter advantages. The stake back for one fail isn't a strong enough incentive for me, particularly as Hills are always skinny as fuck with their odds. That's just another moron punter strategy in my book, people who don't care if they throw money away and who don't have the basic primary school arithmetic to do the maths.

Just take your medicine and take your spot on the subs bench. 
 

No point crying over spilled milk and makes for a more enjoyable thread  

 

[robbojunior]

Why am I still not on the fucking subs bench for this?

Can whoever is running this shit show please add me.  Looks like you need me.

[Henry]

7 minutes ago, rocket_scientist said:

I'll help him by going to the bench if you all agree that the early pay out pick in a winning acca should be dropped? What do you think?

I agree it would be for the best for you to take the hit this time for the good of the thread.

and for future weeks, unless an official hatacca bookie is appointed (ie Bet365), then it’s the 90 minute result that counts.

IMO.

[dazzy_deff]

4 minutes ago, rocket_scientist said:

On a thread where we are dealing with a new situation and trying to set it straight for future occurrences, it's always me me me with you isn't it? And this daughter thing, again, what are you trying to do? Is this intended to hurt or offend me? Do you think I give a fuck what you say? Do you even know why you posted that? You certainly didn't know why you sent me my address by PM either, or at least, you haven't been able to clarify why you did that either, nor do you know what you're doing posting my and my wife's name in public.

Is it everything you have a problem thinking through about, this subject (early pay-outs in relation to the subs bench) and why you post what you do? Do you not think properly? Do you not know your own diseased mind?

As with most of your previous, those type of daughter comments just make you look like a sad tit. What a bunch of fuck ups. Poor committee, shitty and sicky, the BoD triumvirate, all upset on a fitba forum cos their weaknesses got exposed. Deal with it, arseholes.

dont know why you've never aired these grievances before.

[dazzy_deff]

7 minutes ago, robbojunior said:

Why am I still not on the fucking subs bench for this?

Can whoever is running this shit show please add me.  Looks like you need me.

are you not banned after two consecutive no shows last season?

[dazzy_deff]

5 minutes ago, Henry said:

I agree it would be for the best for you to take the hit this time for the good of the thread.

and for future weeks, unless an official hatacca bookie is appointed (ie Bet365), then it’s the 90 minute result that counts.

IMO.

AGREED

[robbojunior]

It's pretty fucking obvious that if your pick didn't win, that counts as a loss and you take your place on the bench.

Trying to claim one particular bookie's promotion / perk makes it a winner haha.

Ok I had a free fiver from paddy power this weekend.  my bet lost, but it didn't cost me anything so I'll take that as a win.

[robbojunior]

3 minutes ago, dazzy_deff said:

are you not banned after two consecutive no shows last season?

Did I?

Not that I am aware of.  I know I missed one week but didn't even think two consecutive no shows was possible as you'd drop to the bench wouldn't you?

Anyway, as much as I enjoy the Hat Acca, my life sometimes takes precedence over it and so I apologise if that meant I missed my slot a couple of times. Jeez

 

[robbojunior]

1 minute ago, rocket_scientist said:

My pick did win. Bournemouth netted me £62.42.

It's not obvious at all because it's never happened before. If the acca had won, we need to drop the early pay out winner and that seems to be the easiest choice going forward and something I've already put up for tdd on his return.

Yes that pick won for you personally because of the early payout option with b365.

But in the context of a combined acca with picks from different people who are not specifically using b365, it lost.  Bournemouth didn't win.  Very obvious.

[dazzy_deff]

12 minutes ago, robbojunior said:

Did I?

Not that I am aware of.  I know I missed one week but didn't even think two consecutive no shows was possible as you'd drop to the bench wouldn't you?

Anyway, as much as I enjoy the Hat Acca, my life sometimes takes precedence over it and so I apologise if that meant I missed my slot a couple of times. Jeez

 

I'm only winding you up. 

[robbojunior]

21 minutes ago, dazzy_deff said:

I'm only winding you up. 

STOP WINDING ME UP!!!!!!

?

[dazzy_deff]

41 minutes ago, rocket_scientist said:

The implications of the early pay out and how it affected the poster who picked it for the following week wasn't obvious for these reasons;

1. It hadn't happened before,

2. It hadn't been discussed before,

3, It hadn't been considered or thought about before, and 

4. During the game, three of us were all correctly assuming that that pick had come in.

As I stepped in to do the legwork - thereby saving the opportunity on Saturday for others to lose money - I'm sure tdd will step in to make an exemption in my case and keep me in the starting line up. Actually, I'm not being serious here. I think it's probably best and easiest to bin the poster from a winning acca which only won because of early pay out but bet365 aren't the only ones who do it and anyone who doesn't, as Parky says, is a pretty stupid cunt because the odds difference on those who don't (from when I spent time doing it) wasn't good enough and was often same or worse.

Tdd, we have added a new rule for the acca. The last posted order and sequence is therefore the correct one and the only changes to the tally of in-progess is 0/1 for me and W13, L11 for the total (which the mutant missed when trying to be a smart arse). I suggest you do give the picks out of i.e. W & L rather than total winners and add in the winning streaks as I did. It'll make it easier for you.

And how the fuck did you get the names on consecutive lines? There's always a space when I do it, like creating a new paragraph.

Glad you've seen sense and realised you backed a donkey. 

Have a smashing evening.

[dazzy_deff]

29 minutes ago, robbojunior said:

STOP WINDING ME UP!!!!!!

?

MUTANT

[Don Fonte]

3 hours ago, robbojunior said:

Did I?

Not that I am aware of.  I know I missed one week but didn't even think two consecutive no shows was possible as you'd drop to the bench wouldn't you?

Anyway, as much as I enjoy the Hat Acca, my life sometimes takes precedence over it and so I apologise if that meant I missed my slot a couple of times. Jeez

 

Don't think you've ever even had a correct pick. Stay on the bench.

[Studebaker-90]

Dandy don has likely logged in and thought fuck this I’m out. The usual suspects turning the thread to shit. 

[Don Fonte]

Hibs to beat Livingston - 4/5 (early value)

[dazzy_deff]

58 minutes ago, Studebaker-90 said:

Dandy don has likely logged in and thought fuck this I’m out. The usual suspects turning the thread to shit. 

*Suspect