I challenged you to a best of 3, you won 1 of that challenge and refuse the other 2. When you will win that one, i will say that you are the best, otherwise you just look like a coward to my eyes, like...let's party as long as i beat him, because we all know that on the long time you wouldn't have chance.

i haven't played anybody 3 games and never agreed to play 3 with you. you're lucky you got a second chance in the ladder but alas you got destroyed there too. not worth my time to keep dunking on you to be honest.

Boo! Terrible sportsmanship, the crowd wants a best of 3.

lol... maybe sze should keep you a lesson about something called variance. winning 1 or 2 won't prove anything, playing 5-10 games starts to give you a clear idea about the real level. Just like poker, just like anything.

giochi su la scala: billy walsh > hhh. billy walsh > red. red > hhh.

dunque: billy walsh > red > hhh?

billy, you even managed to type my 2 number name wrong :/

Boo! Terrible sportsmanship, the crowd wants a best of 3.

I just posted two games I beat him in. I don't know how they do it in Pigistan but in the USA best of 3 is over when somebody wins the first two.

Tgiochi su la scala: billy walsh > hhh. billy walsh > red. red > hhh.

dunque: billy walsh > red > hhh?

wut

lol... maybe sze should keep you a lesson about something called variance. winning 1 or 2 won't prove anything, playing 5-10 games starts to give you a clear idea about the real level. Just like poker, just like anything.

You can make this argument about one game but when you lose two of them and get absolutely demolished in both of them, the variance argument looks a lot like crying.

Please stop crying.

In Styland one first agrees to a best of 3 and then plays 2 games as part of that best of 3. A ladder game that happens to coincide with the time frame of the best of 3 is not relevant. I want to see red get shmooshed again is that too much to ask?

he can challenge me again in the future after he gets better. it's just not a challenge right now. too easy.

i'd like to see Red picking that bad against me too :/

wow this is how you start the ladder.........

1 of 2 losses to Red hahahahahahahahahahhaha

red is terrible what happened??

seems really weird that you can get a rating of 2157 and the highest rating of somebody you've beaten is 2076 oO

sorry 2041 - and lost to 2076. ya the rating algorithm needs some adjustment. that shouldn't be possible imo

I agree Billy, the algorithm is rigged! When we saw you were about to join the ladder, we asked Fizzer in secret to change the algorithm, so you could not get to #1. Proof of that are your games with Red, you annihalated him multiple times proving without a doubt you were the alpha male, yet your rating is lower than him... it's weird you have not yet picked up on that.

Got em

i think the algorithm has done a good job with me, but for you i think it's not correct. or maybe i just don't understand the logic. in chess you never get a rating higher than the highest rating of somebody you have beaten. there are many people with ratings higher than that of the best person you have beaten, yet your ratings is higher than theirs. that doesn't make sense.

nice job though going 13-2 in your first 15 games...