Anger Management over/under 46

Royler · Apr 14, 2003

JCambert,

A search of your posts indicates a real problem with social retardation. You come off like someone who feels put out by contributing. Considering that you don't know your way around a wager, why bother?

"Box office money is WAY, WAY, WAY down this year, thus lending credence to the fact that, no matter how big a hit, it won't make 45 million."

Wrong.

"You are saying that, in a year where moviegoing is down, you think that there is a 59% or greater chance that this record will be broken by $10 million dollars? I don't think so."

Wrong.

"First off, as stated at least three separate times in my other posts, THIS IS A YEAR WHERE MOVIEGOING IN GENERAL IS DOWN!!!!!"

Who the **** asked you to post even once?

Enough with the holier-than-thou babble. There's a way to get your (worthless) message across and not come off like someone who didn't get hugged enough as a child. Learn it.

As for me being a "bitter gambling loser", I suggest you perform a search of my posts and find out exactly how much of a loser I am.

If anyone actually values input from this arrogant cretin, speak up now.

Oren1 · Apr 14, 2003

jcambert, it was a lot closer than you thought it would be, but you were right in the end, although some of your aguments weren't completely valid. After researching it a bit more, I realized how rare it is for a film to hit 50 million on it's first weekend. It does appear that this years box office is down 13% from last years. After this weekend I would suspect that number will be a bit smaller. Before the month of March, 2003 movies were actually out-grossing 2002. I'm hoping for a big May 2nd weekend...

jcambert · Apr 14, 2003

Royler, I won't even bother addressing you, as you are obviously a person with nothing even remotely worthwhile or intelligent to contribute. As such, you aren't the type of person that I would even waste a breath in replying to.

Oren, I agree that it was closer than what I thought it would be, but, my argument the whole time was in favor of "value" and, I felt that the value portion of the bet was on the under because you were taking back +150. And, I felt that there was about a 55% to 60% chance that the bet would fall UNDER the posted total, thus making it a TREMENDOUS value. In the end, it was a winner, and, I'm happy about that. In the future, healthy discussions which are aimed at helping one another win are what we should go for.

JP