In a match Grady gives the score and then says "Shannon has a 2 ball advantage.",
I thought too myself not really! Your comments.
Shannon has to make 2 less balls.
Rod.
In a match Grady gives the score and then says "Shannon has a 2 ball advantage.",
I thought too myself not really! Your comments.
Shannon has to make 2 less balls.
Rod.
So 10-8 is the same as 8-6 ?
You're confusing quantity with importance. 2 balls can be more or less important depending on other things (like match length), but it's still 2 balls.unoperro:androd:
Shannon has to make 2 less balls.
So 10-8 is the same as 8-6 ?
You're confusing quantity with importance. 2 balls can be more or less important depending on other things (like match length), but it's still 2 balls.
pj
chgo
I don't know for a fact but i'm assuming that either the score was mentioned or known, when Grady said that Shannon had a two ball advantage. I would also believe that regardless of the score if either player had to make two more balls than his opponent it would be a two ball advantage. Agree? If you want to get technical you could also say that Shannon is a 125/100 favorite in the ball count. However, if you want to keep it simple..a two ball advantage 10/8 should be acceptable. Imo. Chalk me up with your side.Saying a player has a 2 ball advantage does not give all of the information, like giving the score would. I am sure those guys in the booth kinda struggle at times, like writers, with repeating things yet wording them differently.... which is probably a good idea. It is perfectly acceptable wording after stating the score. Chalk me up on the "this score is in fact a 2 ball advantage" side of things.
In a match Grady gives the score and then says "Shannon has a 2 ball advantage.",
I thought too myself not really! Your comments.
All right, I'll give you the right answer that nobody has given yet.
Shannon does NOT have a two ball advantage because he has no balls. It would be correct to say that Efren is at a two ball disadvantage.
In the real world it makes no difference but this is the correct interpretation.
Long as we're talking semantics...All right, I'll give you the right answer that nobody has given yet.
Shannon does NOT have a two ball advantage because he has no balls. It would be correct to say that Efren is at a two ball disadvantage.
In the real world it makes no difference but this is the correct interpretation.
You have too much sense to be a regular poster Patrick.Long as we're talking semantics...
A disadvantage for Efren is an advantage for Shannon.
"Advantage" doesn't necessarily mean "have balls". What if they both owed balls, but one owed more? Would nobody have an advantage?
pj
chgo
Long as we're talking semantics...
A disadvantage for Efren is an advantage for Shannon.
"Advantage" doesn't necessarily mean "have balls". What if they both owed balls, but one owed more? Would nobody have an advantage?
pj
chgo
I don't think "the advantage" is measured by how close Shannon is to winning (absolute); I think it's measured by how much closer he is to winning than Efren is (relative).Dennis:Me:
Long as we're talking semantics...
A disadvantage for Efren is an advantage for Shannon.
"Advantage" doesn't necessarily mean "have balls". What if they both owed balls, but one owed more? Would nobody have an advantage?
O.K. PJ, I'll bite.
Shannon is no closer to winning the game than he was before it started, thus he has no advantage.
You're correct with saying that Shannon has the advantage for the reason you statedI don't think "the advantage" is measured by how close Shannon is to winning (absolute); I think it's measured by how much closer he is to winning than Efren is (relative).
[Deleted the rest of my too-long-winded post.]
pj <- just shootin' the breeze, Dennis ...
chgo
O.K. PJ, I'll bite.
Shannon is no closer to winning the game than he was before it started, thus he has no advantage. Efren is farther away from winning the game than he was when the game started, thus Efren has the disadvantage.
Efren could owe 20 balls and Shannon still doesn't get closer to winning because of it.
Dennis
I don't think "the advantage" is measured by how close Shannon is to winning (absolute); I think it's measured by how much closer he is to winning than Efren is (relative).
[Deleted the rest of my too-long-winded post.]
pj <- just shootin' the breeze, Dennis ...
chgo