Random rantings and ravings about the Los Angeles Dodgers, written by a small consortium of rabid Dodger fans. With occasional comments on baseball, entertainment, pop culture, and life in general.
The Readers take the bottom-front-left corner spot, clearly telegraphing a premature attempt to set-up the standard strong-side Patagonian Gambit. By countering with II-3-B, the Writers easily dismiss the threat.
You gotta do better than that, Readers:
4/3 vs. SF (W, 5-4): Sax
4/15 vs. WSH (L, 4-6): Dusty, Orel, Sax
5/6 vs. MIA (W, 6-3): AC, Sax
5/16 vs. CIN (L, 2-7): AC, Sax
6/12 vs. TEX (L, 2-3): Sax
7/5 vs. MIL (W, 8-5): Sax
7/21 vs. BOS (W, 9-6): Sax
7/24 vs. SF (L, 3-8): Sax
8/24 vs. TB (L, 8-9 (10)): Sax
8/29 vs. BAL (W, 6-3): Orel, Sax
9/9 vs. CHC (L, 4-10): Sax
14 comments:
After a week away from the office, I'm finally back.
ie, I'll be spending more time on SoSG again.
Level 1, row 3, column C
OK, I got the row and column all transmorgified, but you know what I mean.
Looks like they have two ways to go, so there are two ways to block. The way I chose gives us, I think, an attack as well.
@ rbnlaw
I was the first to go that route. I'm glad I am not alone.
Great minds and all that, Dr. G.
I prefer my gambits Cajun, thank you.
I don't know about Patagonian gambits, but there was this one time, at band camp. . .
Don't know where else to put this, so here:
From DT:
Six front-office employees who were hired by former Dodgers vice president Charles Steinberg were fired. They were public relations officers Mark Rogoff and Drew Merle, vice president of creative services Tom Catlin, graphics manager Courtney Cowsill, fan services and hospitality director Jahaan Blake and supervisor of the Ambassadors program Alyssa Shuman.
No Steinberg = no more DSB or GBA? One can only hope.
I did what rbnlaw said.
OK, I need Ubragg and Q7 to get in here. If I'm leading the charge, there might be something amiss.
Or, I could just be correct. Who knows?
Your strategy seems good to me rbnlaw. I was wondering when we'd be able to issue an attack and not just play on the defensive.
Now. II,A,1
I agree rbnlaw, just put in votes for II, A, 1.
I feel bolstered by ubragg's comment.
Patagonian's be damned. We could mount an attack from this position.
Post a Comment