| |
Main
Date: 31 Aug 2006 09:38:32
From: IcUrdazedandconfused
Subject: Settling up after wolf - Help with the "dots"
|
Played yesterday with some friends, and I'm trying to figure a better
way to "settle" up at the end. We played $0.50 a dot. Is there an
easier way to do the calculations than this?
dots Tommy Jim Steve Tony owed
Tommy 22 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Jim 18 $2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2.00
Steve 17 $2.50 $0.50 $0.00 $0.00 $3.00
Tony 16 $3.00 $1.00 $0.50 $0.00 $4.50
won $7.50 $1.50 $0.50 $0.00
This gets in to the loser here (me) having to pay three people; Is
there another way to calculate this to make it easier to see who owes
who?
|
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 15:18:54
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: Settling up after wolf - Help with the "dots"
|
long&left wrote:
> sh*t, try it with automatic 2 dot down presses :)
Shit indeed, big spender!
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 10:35:02
From: Larry Bud
Subject: Re: Settling up after wolf - Help with the "dots"
|
IcUrdazedandconfused wrote:
> On 31 Aug 2006 07:05:44 -0700, "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >IcUrdazedandconfused wrote:
> >> Played yesterday with some friends, and I'm trying to figure a better
> >> way to "settle" up at the end. We played $0.50 a dot. Is there an
> >> easier way to do the calculations than this?
> >>
> >> dots Tommy Jim Steve Tony owed
> >> Tommy 22 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
> >> Jim 18 $2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2.00
> >> Steve 17 $2.50 $0.50 $0.00 $0.00 $3.00
> >> Tony 16 $3.00 $1.00 $0.50 $0.00 $4.50
> >>
> >> won $7.50 $1.50 $0.50 $0.00
> >>
> >> This gets in to the loser here (me) having to pay three people; Is
> >> there another way to calculate this to make it easier to see who owes
> >> who?
> >
> >Why is it difficult? Just seeing the total # of pts tells me who has
> >to pay who. You really don't need to calculate how much each person
> >won.
>
> The guy that kept the dots yesterday had me paying Tommy $4.50, and
> the rest of them going scot free. That is why I was looking for
> something easier; I knew that he had done it wrong, but he used some
> sort of "take the total number of dots, multiply by 4, then divide by
> your dots". It left me just dumbfounded in how he did it.
He ripped you off. All that has to be remembered is that if you have
less dots than someone, you pay them, if they have less dots than you,
they pay you.
I don't think in wolf you could do what he's saying because the number
of pts per game isn't static, since it depends on how many times
someone goes alone.
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 08:38:44
From: Tex
Subject: Re: Settling up after wolf - Help with the "dots"
|
John van der Pflum wrote:
> On 31 Aug 2006 09:54:03 -0500, Aress Gee
> <invalid@not_real_address.com> wrote:
>
> >IcUrdazedandconfused <IcUrdazed@confused.net> writes:
> >
> >> Played yesterday with some friends, and I'm trying to figure a better
> >> way to "settle" up at the end. We played $0.50 a dot. Is there an
> >> easier way to do the calculations than this?
> >>
> >> dots Tommy Jim Steve Tony owed
> >> Tommy 22 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
> >> Jim 18 $2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2.00
> >> Steve 17 $2.50 $0.50 $0.00 $0.00 $3.00
> >> Tony 16 $3.00 $1.00 $0.50 $0.00 $4.50
> >>
> >> won $7.50 $1.50 $0.50 $0.00
> >>
> >> This gets in to the loser here (me) having to pay three people; Is
> >> there another way to calculate this to make it easier to see who owes
> >> who?
> >
> >I see it this way:
> >
> >Name Dots
> >--------------
> >AA 6
> >BB 2
> >CC 1
> >DD 0
> >
> >AA is plus (3 * 6) and minus 3 for (+15 * 0.50) = +7.50
> >BB is plus (3 * 2) and minus (6 + 1) for (-1 * 0.50) = -0.50
> >CC is plus (3 * 1) and minus (6 + 2) for (-5 * 0.50) = -2.50
> >DD is minus 9 for (-9 *.0.50) = -4.50
>
> See.... this is exactly why I don't play these kind of games. That
> math is WAY over my head and who really wants to sit down with a
> calculator after a round to figure it out?
If you made more birdies you wouldn't have to pay :)
Tex
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 09:54:03
From: Aress Gee
Subject: Re: Settling up after wolf - Help with the "dots"
|
IcUrdazedandconfused <IcUrdazed@confused.net > writes:
> Played yesterday with some friends, and I'm trying to figure a better
> way to "settle" up at the end. We played $0.50 a dot. Is there an
> easier way to do the calculations than this?
>
> dots Tommy Jim Steve Tony owed
> Tommy 22 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
> Jim 18 $2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2.00
> Steve 17 $2.50 $0.50 $0.00 $0.00 $3.00
> Tony 16 $3.00 $1.00 $0.50 $0.00 $4.50
>
> won $7.50 $1.50 $0.50 $0.00
>
> This gets in to the loser here (me) having to pay three people; Is
> there another way to calculate this to make it easier to see who owes
> who?
I see it this way:
Name Dots
--------------
AA 6
BB 2
CC 1
DD 0
AA is plus (3 * 6) and minus 3 for (+15 * 0.50) = +7.50
BB is plus (3 * 2) and minus (6 + 1) for (-1 * 0.50) = -0.50
CC is plus (3 * 1) and minus (6 + 2) for (-5 * 0.50) = -2.50
DD is minus 9 for (-9 *.0.50) = -4.50
--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Mr. Aress Gee
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 12:19:41
From: Ed Vogel
Subject: Re: Settling up after wolf - Help with the "dots"
|
"Aress Gee" <invalid@not_real_address.com > wrote in message
news:bark64pdkhg.fsf@server007.serverquality.com...
> IcUrdazedandconfused <IcUrdazed@confused.net> writes:
>
> I see it this way:
>
> Name Dots
> --------------
> AA 6
> BB 2
> CC 1
> DD 0
>
> AA is plus (3 * 6) and minus 3 for (+15 * 0.50) = +7.50
> BB is plus (3 * 2) and minus (6 + 1) for (-1 * 0.50) = -0.50
> CC is plus (3 * 1) and minus (6 + 2) for (-5 * 0.50) = -2.50
> DD is minus 9 for (-9 *.0.50) = -4.50
>
> --
I understand what you're saying but explain this one too me:
If each dot is worth 50 cents and CC has one more dot than DD, how come
DD has to pay $2 more than CC? (Same can be said for the others...)
Ed
|
| | | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 19:33:18
From: Aress Gee
Subject: Re: Settling up after wolf - Help with the "dots"
|
"Ed Vogel" <edward.vogel@stopppingspam.hp.com > writes:
> "Aress Gee" <invalid@not_real_address.com> wrote in message
> news:bark64pdkhg.fsf@server007.serverquality.com...
> > IcUrdazedandconfused <IcUrdazed@confused.net> writes:
> >
> > I see it this way:
> >
> > Name Dots
> > --------------
> > AA 6
> > BB 2
> > CC 1
> > DD 0
> >
> > AA is plus (3 * 6) and minus 3 for (+15 * 0.50) = +7.50
> > BB is plus (3 * 2) and minus (6 + 1) for (-1 * 0.50) = -0.50
> > CC is plus (3 * 1) and minus (6 + 2) for (-5 * 0.50) = -2.50
> > DD is minus 9 for (-9 *.0.50) = -4.50
> >
> > --
>
> I understand what you're saying but explain this one too me:
> If each dot is worth 50 cents and CC has one more dot than DD, how come
> DD has to pay $2 more than CC? (Same can be said for the others...)
A dot won is worth $1.50 because it has been won
from 3 people at $0.50 each. A dot lost costs
only $0.50 (to each person).
CC has won $1.50 more than DD and has lost $0.50 less
and $1.50 + $0.50 = $2.00.
--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Mr. Aress Gee
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
| | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 09:07:04
From: Ed Vogel
Subject: Re: Settling up after wolf - Help with the "dots"
|
"Aress Gee" <invalid@not_real_address.com > wrote in message
news:barmz9kifxt.fsf@server007.serverquality.com...
>
> A dot won is worth $1.50 because it has been won
> from 3 people at $0.50 each. A dot lost costs
> only $0.50 (to each person).
>
> CC has won $1.50 more than DD and has lost $0.50 less
> and $1.50 + $0.50 = $2.00.
>
Thank you for the reply. I guess I play differently. When I play
a dot is worth 50 cents to both winner and loser. If the hole
plays 2 vs 2, the winners each get one dot (which represents 50 cents
owed by the two losers to the two winners). If the hole plays
3 vs 1, then the 1 gets 3 dots if he wins, or the three get one dot
each if they win (either way, the winners only get 50 cents for each
dot).
How do you track dots so that each one won is worth $1.50?
Thanks (again),
Ed
|
| | | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 13:09:18
From: Aress Gee
Subject: Re: Settling up after wolf - Help with the "dots"
|
"Ed Vogel" <edward.vogel@stopppingspam.hp.com > writes:
> "Aress Gee" <invalid@not_real_address.com> wrote in message
> news:barmz9kifxt.fsf@server007.serverquality.com...
> >
> > A dot won is worth $1.50 because it has been won
> > from 3 people at $0.50 each. A dot lost costs
> > only $0.50 (to each person).
> >
> > CC has won $1.50 more than DD and has lost $0.50 less
> > and $1.50 + $0.50 = $2.00.
> >
>
> Thank you for the reply. I guess I play differently. When I play
> a dot is worth 50 cents to both winner and loser. If the hole
> plays 2 vs 2, the winners each get one dot (which represents 50 cents
> owed by the two losers to the two winners). If the hole plays
> 3 vs 1, then the 1 gets 3 dots if he wins, or the three get one dot
> each if they win (either way, the winners only get 50 cents for each
> dot).
>
> How do you track dots so that each one won is worth $1.50?
>
> Thanks (again),
I was helping out with a math problem -- a player winning
a dot has won it from 3 other players, hence 3 times the
value of the dot.
I've never played Wolf, beats me what the rules of it are.
--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Mr. Aress Gee
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 11:21:46
From: John van der Pflum
Subject: Re: Settling up after wolf - Help with the "dots"
|
On 31 Aug 2006 09:54:03 -0500, Aress Gee
<invalid@not_real_address.com > wrote:
>IcUrdazedandconfused <IcUrdazed@confused.net> writes:
>
>> Played yesterday with some friends, and I'm trying to figure a better
>> way to "settle" up at the end. We played $0.50 a dot. Is there an
>> easier way to do the calculations than this?
>>
>> dots Tommy Jim Steve Tony owed
>> Tommy 22 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
>> Jim 18 $2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2.00
>> Steve 17 $2.50 $0.50 $0.00 $0.00 $3.00
>> Tony 16 $3.00 $1.00 $0.50 $0.00 $4.50
>>
>> won $7.50 $1.50 $0.50 $0.00
>>
>> This gets in to the loser here (me) having to pay three people; Is
>> there another way to calculate this to make it easier to see who owes
>> who?
>
>I see it this way:
>
>Name Dots
>--------------
>AA 6
>BB 2
>CC 1
>DD 0
>
>AA is plus (3 * 6) and minus 3 for (+15 * 0.50) = +7.50
>BB is plus (3 * 2) and minus (6 + 1) for (-1 * 0.50) = -0.50
>CC is plus (3 * 1) and minus (6 + 2) for (-5 * 0.50) = -2.50
>DD is minus 9 for (-9 *.0.50) = -4.50
See.... this is exactly why I don't play these kind of games. That
math is WAY over my head and who really wants to sit down with a
calculator after a round to figure it out?
Match play or no way.
Of course it could be the fact that I went to public school and wasn't
learned good about "guz-in-tas" (apologies to Jethro from Beverly
Hillbillies). Wait ... I went to private school. Maybe I'm just a
doofus.
--
jvdp
The only way to beat me is to make a hole in one
http://www.rsgcincinnati.com
|
| | | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 09:56:23
From: long&left
Subject: Re: Settling up after wolf - Help with the "dots"
|
John van der Pflum wrote:
> On 31 Aug 2006 09:54:03 -0500, Aress Gee
> <invalid@not_real_address.com> wrote:
>
>
>>IcUrdazedandconfused <IcUrdazed@confused.net> writes:
>>
>>
>>>Played yesterday with some friends, and I'm trying to figure a better
>>>way to "settle" up at the end. We played $0.50 a dot. Is there an
>>>easier way to do the calculations than this?
>>>
>>> dots Tommy Jim Steve Tony owed
>>>Tommy 22 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
>>>Jim 18 $2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2.00
>>>Steve 17 $2.50 $0.50 $0.00 $0.00 $3.00
>>>Tony 16 $3.00 $1.00 $0.50 $0.00 $4.50
>>>
>>> won $7.50 $1.50 $0.50 $0.00
>>>
>>>This gets in to the loser here (me) having to pay three people; Is
>>>there another way to calculate this to make it easier to see who owes
>>>who?
>>
>>I see it this way:
>>
>>Name Dots
>>--------------
>>AA 6
>>BB 2
>>CC 1
>>DD 0
>>
>>AA is plus (3 * 6) and minus 3 for (+15 * 0.50) = +7.50
>>BB is plus (3 * 2) and minus (6 + 1) for (-1 * 0.50) = -0.50
>>CC is plus (3 * 1) and minus (6 + 2) for (-5 * 0.50) = -2.50
>>DD is minus 9 for (-9 *.0.50) = -4.50
>
>
> See.... this is exactly why I don't play these kind of games. That
> math is WAY over my head and who really wants to sit down with a
> calculator after a round to figure it out?
>
> Match play or no way.
>
> Of course it could be the fact that I went to public school and wasn't
> learned good about "guz-in-tas" (apologies to Jethro from Beverly
> Hillbillies). Wait ... I went to private school. Maybe I'm just a
> doofus.
sh*t, try it with automatic 2 dot down presses :)
|
| | | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 10:45:09
From: Aress Gee
Subject: Re: Settling up after wolf - Help with the "dots"
|
John van der Pflum <jpflumjr@ughookugh.com > writes:
> On 31 Aug 2006 09:54:03 -0500, Aress Gee
> <invalid@not_real_address.com> wrote:
>
> >IcUrdazedandconfused <IcUrdazed@confused.net> writes:
> >
> >> Played yesterday with some friends, and I'm trying to figure a better
> >> way to "settle" up at the end. We played $0.50 a dot. Is there an
> >> easier way to do the calculations than this?
> >>
> >> dots Tommy Jim Steve Tony owed
> >> Tommy 22 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
> >> Jim 18 $2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2.00
> >> Steve 17 $2.50 $0.50 $0.00 $0.00 $3.00
> >> Tony 16 $3.00 $1.00 $0.50 $0.00 $4.50
> >>
> >> won $7.50 $1.50 $0.50 $0.00
> >>
> >> This gets in to the loser here (me) having to pay three people; Is
> >> there another way to calculate this to make it easier to see who owes
> >> who?
> >
> >I see it this way:
> >
> >Name Dots
> >--------------
> >AA 6
> >BB 2
> >CC 1
> >DD 0
> >
> >AA is plus (3 * 6) and minus 3 for (+15 * 0.50) = +7.50
> >BB is plus (3 * 2) and minus (6 + 1) for (-1 * 0.50) = -0.50
> >CC is plus (3 * 1) and minus (6 + 2) for (-5 * 0.50) = -2.50
> >DD is minus 9 for (-9 *.0.50) = -4.50
>
> See.... this is exactly why I don't play these kind of games. That
> math is WAY over my head and who really wants to sit down with a
> calculator after a round to figure it out?
>
> Match play or no way.
>
> Of course it could be the fact that I went to public school and wasn't
> learned good about "guz-in-tas" (apologies to Jethro from Beverly
> Hillbillies). Wait ... I went to private school. Maybe I'm just a
> doofus.
Yer cipherin' ain't no good, boy.
I usually just put my wallet on the table and
hope that the vultures leave me a little.
--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Mr. Aress Gee
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 15:19:04
From: Howard U. Dewing
Subject: Re: Settling up after wolf - Help with the "dots"
|
Aress Gee wrote:
>>who?
>
>
> I see it this way:
>
> Name Dots
> --------------
> AA 6
> BB 2
> CC 1
> DD 0
>
> AA is plus (3 * 6) and minus 3 for (+15 * 0.50) = +7.50
> BB is plus (3 * 2) and minus (6 + 1) for (-1 * 0.50) = -0.50
> CC is plus (3 * 1) and minus (6 + 2) for (-5 * 0.50) = -2.50
> DD is minus 9 for (-9 *.0.50) = -4.50
>
This is the way to do it. Calculate winnings and losses. All the losers
pay the table; the winners take what they're owed.
In this scenario, three people put money in the pot; AA takes it all. In
some cases two will pay and two will take, etc.
--
Howard U. Dewing
I made up this name. It was a choice between this and Watson deMehneux.
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 07:28:23
From: Tex
Subject: Re: Settling up after wolf - Help with the "dots"
|
IcUrdazedandconfused wrote:
> Played yesterday with some friends, and I'm trying to figure a better
> way to "settle" up at the end. We played $0.50 a dot. Is there an
> easier way to do the calculations than this?
>
> dots Tommy Jim Steve Tony owed
> Tommy 22 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
> Jim 18 $2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2.00
> Steve 17 $2.50 $0.50 $0.00 $0.00 $3.00
> Tony 16 $3.00 $1.00 $0.50 $0.00 $4.50
>
> won $7.50 $1.50 $0.50 $0.00
>
> This gets in to the loser here (me) having to pay three people; Is
> there another way to calculate this to make it easier to see who owes
> who?
Tony pays Steve $0.50, Jim $1.00 and Tommy $3.00
Steve pays Jim $0.50 and Tommy $2.50
Jim pays Tommy $2.00
How hard was that?
Tex
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 07:05:44
From: Larry Bud
Subject: Re: Settling up after wolf - Help with the "dots"
|
IcUrdazedandconfused wrote:
> Played yesterday with some friends, and I'm trying to figure a better
> way to "settle" up at the end. We played $0.50 a dot. Is there an
> easier way to do the calculations than this?
>
> dots Tommy Jim Steve Tony owed
> Tommy 22 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
> Jim 18 $2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2.00
> Steve 17 $2.50 $0.50 $0.00 $0.00 $3.00
> Tony 16 $3.00 $1.00 $0.50 $0.00 $4.50
>
> won $7.50 $1.50 $0.50 $0.00
>
> This gets in to the loser here (me) having to pay three people; Is
> there another way to calculate this to make it easier to see who owes
> who?
Why is it difficult? Just seeing the total # of pts tells me who has
to pay who. You really don't need to calculate how much each person
won.
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 12:41:36
From: IcUrdazedandconfused
Subject: Re: Settling up after wolf - Help with the "dots"
|
On 31 Aug 2006 07:05:44 -0700, "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com >
wrote:
>
>IcUrdazedandconfused wrote:
>> Played yesterday with some friends, and I'm trying to figure a better
>> way to "settle" up at the end. We played $0.50 a dot. Is there an
>> easier way to do the calculations than this?
>>
>> dots Tommy Jim Steve Tony owed
>> Tommy 22 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
>> Jim 18 $2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2.00
>> Steve 17 $2.50 $0.50 $0.00 $0.00 $3.00
>> Tony 16 $3.00 $1.00 $0.50 $0.00 $4.50
>>
>> won $7.50 $1.50 $0.50 $0.00
>>
>> This gets in to the loser here (me) having to pay three people; Is
>> there another way to calculate this to make it easier to see who owes
>> who?
>
>Why is it difficult? Just seeing the total # of pts tells me who has
>to pay who. You really don't need to calculate how much each person
>won.
The guy that kept the dots yesterday had me paying Tommy $4.50, and
the rest of them going scot free. That is why I was looking for
something easier; I knew that he had done it wrong, but he used some
sort of "take the total number of dots, multiply by 4, then divide by
your dots". It left me just dumbfounded in how he did it.
I figured someone must have come up with an easier way that would
avoid people having to pay 2 or 3 others, and just come up with an
"eliminate the middleman" way of doing it, like he was trying to do,
but doing it correctly....
|
|
