Book 3 - Page 198

Call Waiting

Book 3 - Page 198
Comic - Book 3 - Page 198
Recent posts... (See full thread)
Beating the odds can really have two meanings.

If you mean in terms of pure chance I.e. I predict the next dice roll will be a 6 and it is I have 'beat the odds'

It also takes on a different meaning when you compare it to more 'sophisticated' gambling with outside commentators giving odds that aren't based on anything but their opinion. These games are won by skill and 'beating the odds' is to surprise or defy the conventional wisdom.

So when I say Parson beat the odds I don't literally mean he got lucky I mean the story was told to us in a way that it was unlikely that Parson would win because he was outnumbered by 25 times the amount of troops he had.

He defied the conventional wisdom he pulled something off that most otherwise people couldn't have done. I didn't elaborate any further in my point because I felt it was obvious and it seems a strange tangent to take that I was implying beating the odds just meant he got lucky.
Good and patient explanation, CDS. :)

By the way, I am shocked -- shocked I say -- to see this thread devolve into being all about Jillian again...
"OK, we've reached page 10 so I think it's time for crazy Jillian bashing."
I see what you were going for there, but it's hardly crazy. It was analysis of otherwise poor strategy. But sure, belittle the discussion by making it seem like the points weren't valid. That's gonna help.
Ansan Gotti wrote:
By the way, I am shocked -- shocked I say -- to see this thread devolve into being all about Jillian again...

Image
I think Jillian discussions are always going to come up because her role in the narrative is very loose.

Her actions are inherently what this plot is going to hinge on and it is also the character we have very little handle on and her motivations fluctuate wildly. I'm not a fan of the character but honestly I think that she is ultimately a victim of good writing that in a world of infinitely more interesting characters it is frustrating to be dragged back to her.

In a lesser work of fiction I suspect she would be less controversial.

The other big action of the story will be Don King's reaction to Charlie's offer but we have much less source material to debate this.

This update? Again there isn't much to discuss we have discussed Stanley and his trusting of Parson along with his CW and CC versus trusting Jed's plan so it is natural that discussion would then move onto the over arching plot and its actors. At this point Stanley has minimal impact on the story and the impact he does have we have a much better understanding of.

He wants Parson back and is willing to pay the big bucks for him a relatively simple motivation in comparison to Jillian and the multitude of factors that influence her decision making process.

Ultimately there is just a lot more to talk about.
That's kinda what I was getting at before. In a story full of well-written characters, Jill has a tendency to stick out as the least well-written, by a wide margin. She gets a disproportionate amount of screen time (compared to other non-main characters), but has done very little with it. She just kinda shows up to start shit, then disappears again until PLOTZ needs to happen some more, and voila. She returns, just long enough to McGuffin it up for a dozen pages or so, then she's gone again. The rare instances she shows up in between don't really do much but reinforce the current portrayal of her, so...she remains stale, in a changing world, she's just the living, unchanging, plot device, and has been for the majority of the story.
Lipkin wrote:
The name of Parson's hypothetical side can only be Hamstardam.

Eh, you don't get points for positing the only possible solution.

Like, it'd be funny if you mentioned in a thread that wasn't a reaction to a book that has "Hamsterdance" in the title. Hamsterdance's etymology being that of an eggcorn derived from 'Amsterdam. :geek:

...what? If people are elaborating on why they're tipping Lipkin, I don't see why I can't explain why I am not.

Also felt like bumping this so I can get rid of one of my "load draft"s.
edit:
Belrodes wrote:
Ozamataz Buckshank wrote:
Zhopa couldn't make a fan, anyway. That's Turnamancy!


Ouch. That one was pretty painful. Have a shmucker for it anyway.

That was a joke? I thought it had been pretty established that wheels and other rotating devices were turnamancy
Anomynous 167 wrote:
Lipkin wrote:
The name of Parson's hypothetical side can only be Hamstardam.

Eh, you don't get points for positing the only possible solution.


He got at least 9 points for it. :hamstard:
Arci wrote:
I'm pretty sure Stanley actually trusts more than just Parson, he just got verbally cornered is all. Remember Stanley is the one that, when he first met Jed, realized that he should have some good questions to ask him, what he is, what he wanted, what was going on, but that would have meant thinking them up. He chose to play it cool and just say what was on his mind instead.

So yeah, I'm thinking this is more than just "Stanley only trusts Parson". It's that he 1, doesn't trust Jed over the advice of both his chiefs and 2, is REALLY bored waiting around for Parson to call him... which could take a while, depending on how well/badly Charlie's pitch to Don goes.

Zhoppa's working the bar.

On that note, I'm glad that Jed hasn't been corrupting Stanley. I was afraid with Jed's insistence on "achieving mellowness" when they first met that he'd eventually wear down Stanley's desire to take over the world. It seems like what he's done instead is to help stabilize him... and help him research his lies for when he's dealing with Don.


That's what I was trying to say about Jed the entire time! No one believed me. *grumble grumble* Also, good catch with Zhopa. I didn't see him there. XD