Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dave Turner" data-source="post: 1377630" data-attributes="member: 12329">I'm a philosophy major, so I like to argue.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />My understanding of the rules of the tournament made the distinction between not posting anything versus posting an incomplete entry a moot one.&nbsp; If I had known that even an incomplete entry could win the round, I probably would have posted what I had.&nbsp; In my previous Iron DM appearance, my utterly contrived use of an ingredient was tantamount to not including it and the judgment made it clear that my entry had no legitimate chance at victory.&nbsp; Paka could only have had a better chance of winning if he had advanced a complete entry, not simply anything at all.&nbsp; After all, if entering anything was allowable, my partial entry would have stood a chance.&nbsp; But by the same token, if I had advanced a complete entry, then I too would have had a better chance of winning than I did.&nbsp; The fact that I did not initially post my incomplete entry didn't ensure Zenld's win.&nbsp; My failure to generate a complete entry at all is what ensured his victory.In the end, I can appreciate Paka's frustration over my collapse.&nbsp; It makes his defeat sting more, since my second round collapse makes it seem as though he was beaten by the &quot;lucky man&quot; rather than the &quot;better man&quot;.&nbsp; In a contest of skill such as this, we prefer to think that talent rather than fortune was the source of our failure.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dave Turner, post: 1377630, member: 12329"] I'm a philosophy major, so I like to argue. ;) My understanding of the rules of the tournament made the distinction between not posting anything versus posting an incomplete entry a moot one. If I had known that even an incomplete entry could win the round, I probably would have posted what I had. In my previous Iron DM appearance, my utterly contrived use of an ingredient was tantamount to not including it and the judgment made it clear that my entry had no legitimate chance at victory. Paka could only have had a better chance of winning if he had advanced a [i]complete[/i] entry, not simply anything at all. After all, if entering [i]anything[/i] was allowable, my partial entry would have stood a chance. But by the same token, if [i]I[/i] had advanced a complete entry, then I too would have had a better chance of winning than I did. The fact that I did not initially post my incomplete entry didn't ensure Zenld's win. My failure to generate a complete entry at all is what ensured his victory. In the end, I can appreciate Paka's frustration over my collapse. It makes his defeat sting more, since my second round collapse makes it seem as though he was beaten by the "lucky man" rather than the "better man". In a contest of skill such as this, we prefer to think that talent rather than fortune was the source of our failure. [/QUOTE]

Verification