What's wrong with my friends?

The Super Bowl has a reputation of being a boring game. Yet, we've had some good ones recently. (In 2000, the Titans lost to the Rams 23-16 but ended the game one yard away from tying the game; in 2002, the Patriots beat the Rams on a last-second field goal; in 2004, the Patriots beat the Panthers 32-29; and in 2005, the Patriots beat the Eagles 24-21)

Anyway, one way to ensure interest throughout the five-hour game is to set up betting squares with a 10 x 10 grid. I won't bore you with the details of how it works, but it holds interest in the game until the very end, which ought to be the point of any five-hour viewing experience.

But my friends don't like playing it. Some complain it is a game of random chance -- rather than based on any skillful football knowledge. Others complain that the $1 entry fee is too high. What's going on here?


Why can't I get people to do betting squares?
They are purposely trying to piss off dl004d.
They just want to watch the game without
a single distraction. Shhhh, the commercials
are on.




Comments

Anonymous said…
I am a big fan of the squares. Ours were $2, and I won $40 by having 3 and 0 at the end of the first quarter. None of my picked-out-of-a-hat $1 picks for first and last TD, sack, or interception, much less first commercial, won. Still fun for $1.
February 06, 2006
dl004d said…
First commercial? That sounds like a scam -- I'm sure someone could just look that up online and then take your money!
February 06, 2006
Josh said…
Betting squares RUINED the Rams-Titans Super Bowl for me. I swear, I was the only person in the room watching the game instead of listening to KC bitch about the end of every quarter.
February 09, 2006
Anonymous said…
What IS wrong with your friends? We all enjoyed a rousing round of $1 square at the blogstrom's super bowl party and for the first time ever demand for squares overwhelmed supply.
February 10, 2006
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Incumbents didn't stand a chance

Image
Kamala Harris had an advantage in fundraising and campaign mobilization. Yet she got trounced. The lesson is that advertising and organizing doesn't matter in politics, right? Wrong. In the battleground states where she leveraged those resource advantages, Harris underperformed Joe Biden's 2020 results by 1.6 points . In the non-battleground states where she did not meaningfully compete, she underperformed 2020 by 3.9 points . This means that i n the places where the Harris campaign spent money and organized and knocked on doors, she did better.* Duh, it wasn't enough. Yet consider the political environment in 2024 for incumbent parties: across the world this year, each governing party facing election has lost vote share. Every single one. (This is the first time that had ever happened.) No one would suggest that Democrats pat themselves on the back when the result of their efforts is a Donald Trump victory. But look at this chart:**  The red dot is the 2024 Democrats, the ...
Read more

USC goes commando

Image
I've always thought USC cheerleaders were pretty classy (to the extent that such a classification is possible in the cheerleading world). They wear long-sleeved white turtlenecks, rather than the skimpy tops donned by most cheerleading teams. But yesterday I discovered that a USC Song Girl named Megan Ramer doesn't wear underwear. Britney Spears, are you responsible for this?
Read more

Paperweights have become paperweights

Image
When something goes unused or becomes obsolete, it's said to become a paperweight. Is your cellphone slow and out of date? It's become a paperweight. Is your laptop too slow to use? It's become a paperweight. Do you never use your Apple Vision Pro? It's become a paperweight. Weirdly, paper itself has become a paperweight. People do their work on laptops, tablets, and phones. Most homes don't have printers. Not only do we not need paperweights, we barely need paper!
Read more