cosmicway

Morata is their top player and the only one who survived ! The penalty was from the orgies of Lucretia Borghia.

Kalomoira

Turkey 4 - Holland 2 !!!

Rug not nailed in properly - obviously the fault of the marine detail.

It's a similarly big ask of City and Bayern.

PSG are having to face two beasts, Bayern and City but I think they are also underrated by the bookies.

We did not really say they are pushovers like Jeunesse Esch but they are rated below all of the other six.

Porto under Mourinho eliminated us, did n't they ?

Two matches against City and a possible CL final ! Think Pep.

Poor performance today but it was by intention.

Current Elo ratings from clubelo.com: Man. City = 2022 Dortmund = 1814 Porto =1798 Chelsea = 1894 Bayern = 2015 PSG = 1859 Real Madrid = 1913 Liverpool = 1904 Probability analysis based on those ratings gives the following results (probability and fair price in parenthesis) finalists pairs Man. City - Porto 5.5% (18.24) Man. City - Chelsea 12% (8.33) Man. City - Real Madrid 12% (8.32) Man. City - Liverpool 11% (9.09) Dortmund - Porto 1.3% (77) Dortmund - Chelsea 2.8% (35.15) Dortmund - Real Madrid 2.8% (35.14) Dortmund - Liverpool 2.6% (38.35) Bayern - Porto 5% (20) Bayern - Chelsea 11% (9.13) Bayern - Real Madrid 11% (9.13) Bayern - Liverpool 10% (9.96) PSG - Porto 1.8% (57.07) PSG - Chelsea 3.8% (26.06) PSG - Real Madrid 3.8% (26.04) PSG - Liverpool 3.5% (28.43) winner Man. City 26.3% (3.81) Dortmund 3.9% (25.86) Porto 4.2% (23.76) Chelsea 12.1% (8.29) Bayern 23.7% (4.22) PSG 5.9% (16.96) Real Madrid 12.6% (7.91) Liverpool 11.3% (8.82) It appears Bayern is the somewhat attractive bet (the bookies offer 4.50). Finalists pairs they do not offer. I suspect however that PSG is underrated. It should be 1950 or threabouts. If this is true then the table is modified and PSG and also Real become also attractive (9.00 and 11.00 at the bookies respectively). Modified table with PSG at 1950: finalists pairs Man. City - Porto 5.3% (18.96) Man. City - Chelsea 11.6% (8.66) Man. City - Real Madrid 11.6% (8.65) Man. City - Liverpool 10.6% (9.44) Dortmund - Porto 1.2% (83.41) Dortmund - Chelsea 2.6% (38.08) Dortmund - Real Madrid 2.6% (38.06) Dortmund - Liverpool 2.4% (41.55) Bayern - Porto 4.3% (23.02) Bayern - Chelsea 9.5% (10.51) Bayern - Real Madrid 9.5% (10.51) Bayern - Liverpool 8.7% (11.47) PSG - Porto 2.7% (36.82) PSG - Chelsea 5.9% (16.81) PSG - Real Madrid 6% (16.8) PSG - Liverpool 5.5% (18.34) winner Man. City 25.3% (3.96) Dortmund 3.6% (28.01) Porto 4.1% (24.49) Chelsea 11.7% (8.58) Bayern 20.6% (4.85) PSG 11.6% (8.59) Real Madrid 12.2% (8.18) Liverpool 11% (9.12)

I will make ergodic analyisis based on the elos for this.

Real are not the great force they were with Ronaldo. Same as in 2012. It was a period of slump for them (under Jose) and had they not failed against Bayern, the 2012 final would have been a walk in the park for CFC.

Yeah ok, they 're not useless. But Juve lost to the crossbars.

Naturally we would like Looserpool.

The three beasts between themselves ! We are in the final.

City - Dortmund Porto - CFC Bayern - PSG Real - Liverpool

Lost fourth bet in a row with Slavia. Backed Leicester to win away. Nuts. Backed Leicester to win at home. Nuts. Backed Slavia to win at home against Rangers. Nuts. Backed Rangers yesterday.

Arsenal v. Olympiakos was a b***dy fix yesterday.

Easy draws: Porto - Liverpool - Dortmund Medium: Real Hard: PSG - City - Bayern

Should have been 6-0 but well done.

He 's two years younger than Giroud though (32-34).

British nuclear arsenal to be increased by 40%, BJ announced. It makes me curious though as to how this is to be used, if ever. Extreme threat from an enemy might be the answer. Ok, sounds logical, but I never understood how a nuke war might actually work. Consider the last war. The biggest operation was D-day. On the 6th of June 1944 the allies launched a surprise attack against the German defenses in Normandy. The objective was to secure the four beaches and then proceed inland. The operation was a success, partly because Adolph Hitler was asleep on the crucial morning. But what if Hitler possessed nukes ? A single bomb would be sufficient ot wipe out the entire invasion fleet and there would be no Normandy invasion. By the same token, for the allies too it would n't make sense to embark on the operation at all. What about Stalingrad and the operation blau in 1942 ? The Germans were held for four months outside the city of Stalingrad and in the end they were encircled and defeated when the Soviet reinforcements arrived. In this case if nukes existed they might have settled the argument much quicker one way or the other. In modern warfare it is considered of vital importance to secure the axis Saxony-Westfalia in Germany. In this case if we are the Warsaw pact or Putin and succeed in doing this, we have NATO on the run. But again is that so ? NATO will use neutron bombs and wipe out the Russians from that place. Then the Russians will respond in kind and hit London-Birmingham-Paris-Rome and NATO will retaliate against Moscow and so on and so forth. So therefore, I don't see how those all important land battles of the last wars will be restaged and give victory to one side or the other. We won't see the likes of Normandy-Stalingrad-Bagration-Anzio-Ardennes and all the rest. How ? If we look at all this as pacifists then it's terrible, it should n't happen. But if we look at it as militarists, it begs the question who wins and how in a nuclear war ? I don't know if the military has an answer and what that answer might be. But I do know that in world wars I and II the militaries were fooled into thinking in terms of the older wars and many strategic mistakes were committed - e.g. the fall of France in 1940. The techological advances and their consequences were disregarded on many occasions with dire results.

Why Giroud out ? Who is going to score goals in this world ? Did he have a yellow card ?