Doc.

Sorry for the poor spelling. Loose/lose is one I'm always mangling because I type at speed. What you [also] failed to pull me up on and that neither of us noticed in the sentence:

"They might show on any particular day, neither punter winning, both loosing, one winning and the other loosing or both punters winning.'
Is the fact that 'both losing' [correct spelling] certainly doesn't need to be there at all after 'neither punter winning' :-)

You made no effort whatsoever to logically dispute my point. You just passed judgment on it as 'flawed logic'. Please prove your point. The odds are on my side, not yours.


Having a go at someone's spelling/grammar [education] is a good trick when you are going to disagree with their argument. It adds weight [but not logic I'm afraid] to your own point by saying with the innuendo: 'I'm a better speller so I'm obviously more intelligent and therefore my point of view is correct'.

After just lambasting a poster in another thread for the crime of using innuendo about someone else's forum handle to put their view down, here you are pulling the exact same trick of using innuendo to put my point down [of course by mentioning Sportz you have allowed yourself the out of 'I was just joking' in case you need it] with no factual logic whatsoever to support your condemnation. You can't beat hypocrisy for a profession on the net. You should take up politics :-)