Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jack Jones
Whoa Mini-D! A little graciousness please? I can't imagine your loosing partners warming up to your assesment of them; nor can I see the rest of your team supporting the idea that you might not do sweet without 'good' partners.
FYI, we (1213) were never alligned with 66, 67, 245, nor 494; yet we faced all of them - twice each! - twice paired against us. We won many; and, I can point to a tactical or temporal error on our part as the reason for not winning the rest.
Many thanks to all the partners who went up against this year's champions with us.
|
I think you misinterpeted my message... the last thing I'm trying to be is ungracious/critical of the partners assigner to us in the Q matches.
What I was trying to say was that it always seem that were with new, less expirenced teams in everymatch. I'm not trying to knock them or anything, I know that at one time my team was just like them.
I dont know, maybe its just that I was getting a little frustrated or that I haven't beenable to get much sleep lately or that Nationals is just around the corner...
Sorry if that last post offened anyone...
__________________
Quote:
|
67 - Yeah... everyone knows why...
|
^InfernoX14^
Team 67 - Great Lakes/Buckeye Regional Winners, West Michigan Regional Quater-Finalists,
Newton Division Winners and NATIONAL CHAMPIONS.
NATIONAL CHAIRMANS AWARD WINNERS
My short list -> 66, 68, 274, 279, 302, 904,
330 and
503