Official Great Works Draft (4 Viewers)

[TidesofWar]

Also - I think The Sex Pistol and Clash selections were abysmal, but that just works to my advantage

 

[Abrantes]

18.10 Song- What's Going On, Marvin Gaye

be back to write it up and provide an unneccessary link.

Damn, I really wanted to pair this with my Sam Cooke pick. Nice one

Awesome song.

 

[timschochet]

I'm not going anywhere. If you don't feel the need to explain yourself as 1) the draft moderator and 2) the judge of plays, then maybe you need to leave since you are clearly unwilling to be any benefit to my participation in this exercise. All I've asked is that you explain your decision based on the selection fitting into the category and you insist on using mockery as your basis of not allowing it.

OK. I am going to swallow my pride and do this one more time, Misfit Blondes, for the sake of the draft. I am going to forget any suspicion I might have of your motives and treat your question seriously. Here is your answer:When I established a "play" category, based on Wikkidpissah's original categories, the intent was very clearly a form of literature which is conceived for the purpose of a live performance on stage, in the theatre. Everyone except yourself has apparently understood this definition without me needing to define it further. Your selection, while a clever play on words, in that you define the word "play" differently than was intended, does not fit into the intended criteria. An event on a football field, with unpredictable results, is not the same as a written play designed to be performed in the theatre. That's why your pick was rejected.I have now given you a full explanation- again. If you are true to your words, now that you have received both an explanation and a veto of your pick, you will now drop this issue and make another selection.

 

[Postradamus]

The Decameron is NOT a novel.

That said, I don't give a F!@#. I really don't.

Where should it go? I was under the impression novellas were placed under the novel category.Sure it's not technically a novel, but It's been cited as one of the earliest direct influences on the novel. I'll gladly move it to WC if there's dissent, but I'd rather it stay put if possible.

What was the ruling on Dubliners?

I think that it belonged in Novels. correct me if I'm wrong. Surely didn't belong in SS since it's essentially a bunch of SS in one collection...

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Don't even try, Tim. You were backed by Krista before you gave any reasoning and you still haven't explained how the selection fails to meet the criteria of "play" so don't try and act like you had full support on something when you hadn't even attempted to explain anything before that point. If you are going to make blind rulings without any actual real debate then you may as well ignore anything I select in the future since I won't be paying any attention to what you have to say. Once again, your ideas of what should be selected are not being met and you pout. You can leave the selection empty or put my selection in as I will not be removing it until you are willing to show me why it does not belong in the category. What you "meant" and what became reality are two different things and the only reason you are unwilling to entertain something outside the norm is because you had your vision and it is now compromised.

Guys, I'm sorry, but I quit. Maybe this is what Misfit Blondes had in mind all along; if so, he's succeeded. If someone else wants to take over, I'll watch, but I'm not going to spend all the time and effort when one of the drafters regards me in this manner. If I am at fault, so be it. If Misfit Blondes wants to drop this and promises not to draft in this manner any longer (and I don't need to define myself further) OR if he chooses to leave, I will be back. Otherwise, no.

I'm not going anywhere. If you don't feel the need to explain yourself as 1) the draft moderator and 2) the judge of plays, then maybe you need to leave since you are clearly unwilling to be any benefit to my participation in this exercise. All I've asked is that you explain your decision based on the selection fitting into the category and you insist on using mockery as your basis of not allowing it.

So you're really neither going to quit or be reasonable? I wish you'd have made it clear 89 pages and more than a week ago that your goal wasn't winning or playing, but to ruin something for 19 other people.

I've asked for someone to clearly indicate why that selection should not be allowed and I haven't seen anything that shows me why it doesn't fit the criteria. The category says "Plays (5) All genres welcome" and what I chose is a play.

I have fairly consistently responded to you both to entertain myself and keep the thread near the top of the page. I get the influ:e:nce in some of this and that part of the comedy is fine. But enough already. The joke is old, the schtick is wore out at this point and you are just being stubborn now for no reason.

 

[Genedoc]

Don't even try, Tim. You were backed by Krista before you gave any reasoning and you still haven't explained how the selection fails to meet the criteria of "play" so don't try and act like you had full support on something when you hadn't even attempted to explain anything before that point. If you are going to make blind rulings without any actual real debate then you may as well ignore anything I select in the future since I won't be paying any attention to what you have to say. Once again, your ideas of what should be selected are not being met and you pout. You can leave the selection empty or put my selection in as I will not be removing it until you are willing to show me why it does not belong in the category. What you "meant" and what became reality are two different things and the only reason you are unwilling to entertain something outside the norm is because you had your vision and it is now compromised.

Guys, I'm sorry, but I quit. Maybe this is what Misfit Blondes had in mind all along; if so, he's succeeded. If someone else wants to take over, I'll watch, but I'm not going to spend all the time and effort when one of the drafters regards me in this manner. If I am at fault, so be it. If Misfit Blondes wants to drop this and promises not to draft in this manner any longer (and I don't need to define myself further) OR if he chooses to leave, I will be back. Otherwise, no.

I'm not going anywhere. If you don't feel the need to explain yourself as 1) the draft moderator and 2) the judge of plays, then maybe you need to leave since you are clearly unwilling to be any benefit to my participation in this exercise. All I've asked is that you explain your decision based on the selection fitting into the category and you insist on using mockery as your basis of not allowing it.

So you're really neither going to quit or be reasonable? I wish you'd have made it clear 89 pages and more than a week ago that your goal wasn't winning or playing, but to ruin something for 19 other people.

I've asked for someone to clearly indicate why that selection should not be allowed and I haven't seen anything that shows me why it doesn't fit the criteria. The category says "Plays (5) All genres welcome" and what I chose is a play.

At this point, MfB is making it clear that his/her goal is to simply ruin something a couple of other dozen people are doing in good faith. I won't allow that. I vote we simply attempt to replace MfB or turn it into an 19 person draft with all choices selected by the MfB team no longer available. We can place MfB on ignore and agree to not quote MfB moving forward.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Lets cut the BS - we all know the Immaculate Reception is not a great work, and does not belong in the play category.Move it to WC if you are that dense, drop it and the sabotage attempt if you are interested in this at all, or get the hell out.

I don't believe that taking the 15th ranked Shakespearean play is going to benefit anyone when this is all said and done so I chose something away from that line of thinking. You might not consider it a great work but it is certainly memorable and is still discussed 35+ years after it was made.

Then put it in the wildcard category. Again - the joke is old.

 

[Genedoc]

I'm not going anywhere. If you don't feel the need to explain yourself as 1) the draft moderator and 2) the judge of plays, then maybe you need to leave since you are clearly unwilling to be any benefit to my participation in this exercise. All I've asked is that you explain your decision based on the selection fitting into the category and you insist on using mockery as your basis of not allowing it.

OK. I am going to swallow my pride and do this one more time, Misfit Blondes, for the sake of the draft. I am going to forget any suspicion I might have of your motives and treat your question seriously. Here is your answer:When I established a "play" category, based on Wikkidpissah's original categories, the intent was very clearly a form of literature which is conceived for the purpose of a live performance on stage, in the theatre. Everyone except yourself has apparently understood this definition without me needing to define it further. Your selection, while a clever play on words, in that you define the word "play" differently than was intended, does not fit into the intended criteria. An event on a football field, with unpredictable results, is not the same as a written play designed to be performed in the theatre. That's why your pick was rejected.

I have now given you a full explanation- again. If you are true to your words, now that you have received both an explanation and a veto of your pick, you will now drop this issue and make another selection.

My intent on this selection was to get away from standard choices. Yes, I was aware that most people were looking at the theatre/stage and that is why I went in another direction. If that is the criteria you want to follow, I will make another selection.

Thank you. Please do.

 

[timschochet]

I'm not going anywhere. If you don't feel the need to explain yourself as 1) the draft moderator and 2) the judge of plays, then maybe you need to leave since you are clearly unwilling to be any benefit to my participation in this exercise. All I've asked is that you explain your decision based on the selection fitting into the category and you insist on using mockery as your basis of not allowing it.

OK. I am going to swallow my pride and do this one more time, Misfit Blondes, for the sake of the draft. I am going to forget any suspicion I might have of your motives and treat your question seriously. Here is your answer:When I established a "play" category, based on Wikkidpissah's original categories, the intent was very clearly a form of literature which is conceived for the purpose of a live performance on stage, in the theatre. Everyone except yourself has apparently understood this definition without me needing to define it further. Your selection, while a clever play on words, in that you define the word "play" differently than was intended, does not fit into the intended criteria. An event on a football field, with unpredictable results, is not the same as a written play designed to be performed in the theatre. That's why your pick was rejected.I have now given you a full explanation- again. If you are true to your words, now that you have received both an explanation and a veto of your pick, you will now drop this issue and make another selection.

My intent on this selection was to get away from standard choices. Yes, I was aware that most people were looking at the theatre/stage and that is why I went in another direction. If that is the criteria you want to follow, I will make another selection.

Thank you. Let's move on, people.

 

[TidesofWar]

I'm not going anywhere. If you don't feel the need to explain yourself as 1) the draft moderator and 2) the judge of plays, then maybe you need to leave since you are clearly unwilling to be any benefit to my participation in this exercise. All I've asked is that you explain your decision based on the selection fitting into the category and you insist on using mockery as your basis of not allowing it.

OK. I am going to swallow my pride and do this one more time, Misfit Blondes, for the sake of the draft. I am going to forget any suspicion I might have of your motives and treat your question seriously. Here is your answer:When I established a "play" category, based on Wikkidpissah's original categories, the intent was very clearly a form of literature which is conceived for the purpose of a live performance on stage, in the theatre. Everyone except yourself has apparently understood this definition without me needing to define it further. Your selection, while a clever play on words, in that you define the word "play" differently than was intended, does not fit into the intended criteria. An event on a football field, with unpredictable results, is not the same as a written play designed to be performed in the theatre. That's why your pick was rejected.I have now given you a full explanation- again. If you are true to your words, now that you have received both an explanation and a veto of your pick, you will now drop this issue and make another selection.

My intent on this selection was to get away from standard choices. Yes, I was aware that most people were looking at the theatre/stage and that is why I went in another direction. If that is the criteria you want to follow, I will make another selection.

The Music City Miracle is not on the board

 

[Bob Lee Swagger]

Let's get this back on track.

 

[Mister CIA]

5th grade recess - play

for the win, 8th grade masturbation - play

 

[Postradamus]

The Decameron is NOT a novel.

That said, I don't give a F!@#. I really don't.

Where should it go? I was under the impression novellas were placed under the novel category.Sure it's not technically a novel, but It's been cited as one of the earliest direct influences on the novel. I'll gladly move it to WC if there's dissent, but I'd rather it stay put if possible.

What was the ruling on Dubliners?

I think that it belonged in Novels. correct me if I'm wrong. Surely didn't belong in SS since it's essentially a bunch of SS in one collection...

Can I get an opinion from some of the others here?

 

[Bob Lee Swagger]

The Decameron is NOT a novel.

That said, I don't give a F!@#. I really don't.

Where should it go? I was under the impression novellas were placed under the novel category.Sure it's not technically a novel, but It's been cited as one of the earliest direct influences on the novel. I'll gladly move it to WC if there's dissent, but I'd rather it stay put if possible.

What was the ruling on Dubliners?

I think that it belonged in Novels. correct me if I'm wrong. Surely didn't belong in SS since it's essentially a bunch of SS in one collection...

Can I get an opinion from some of the others here?

Well, the stories in Dubliners were meant to be read together, in order, i.e., there's a chronological progression in the order that they're presented in the book. They each have their own narrative arcs and different characters, but for our purposes they might as well be called "chapters" instead of "stories." Not chapters in the same narrative arc, but all the narratives together sort of make one big meta-narrative. I say novel.

 

[timschochet]

IIRC, The Dubliners was not wanted as a novel but as a collection of short stories. I deferred to the category judge, who said he would only accept one short story, so "The Dead" was chosen. When Aesop's Fables was chosen, I thought about questioning it, but as El Floppo had no objection, neither did I.

And I have no objection to The Decameron either, but since I will be the one evaluating it, I simply raised a concern that it's difficult to compare this work to a more "normal" novel. But I will do so.

 

[Postradamus]

Yeah, if Aesop goes under novel, Decameron also fits IMO.

 

[rodg12]

I'm not going anywhere. If you don't feel the need to explain yourself as 1) the draft moderator and 2) the judge of plays, then maybe you need to leave since you are clearly unwilling to be any benefit to my participation in this exercise. All I've asked is that you explain your decision based on the selection fitting into the category and you insist on using mockery as your basis of not allowing it.

OK. I am going to swallow my pride and do this one more time, Misfit Blondes, for the sake of the draft. I am going to forget any suspicion I might have of your motives and treat your question seriously. Here is your answer:When I established a "play" category, based on Wikkidpissah's original categories, the intent was very clearly a form of literature which is conceived for the purpose of a live performance on stage, in the theatre. Everyone except yourself has apparently understood this definition without me needing to define it further. Your selection, while a clever play on words, in that you define the word "play" differently than was intended, does not fit into the intended criteria. An event on a football field, with unpredictable results, is not the same as a written play designed to be performed in the theatre. That's why your pick was rejected.I have now given you a full explanation- again. If you are true to your words, now that you have received both an explanation and a veto of your pick, you will now drop this issue and make another selection.

My intent on this selection was to get away from standard choices. Yes, I was aware that most people were looking at the theatre/stage and that is why I went in another direction. If that is the criteria you want to follow, I will make another selection.

Finally.Took much too long, but I'm glad this was resolved.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

I'm ok with novels being opened to these things. They have to be taken and to force them into wildcard because they aren't perfect fits doesn't seem right to the specific category - similar to the tv documentaries being ok in TV.

 

[Dante Hicks]

IIRC, The Dubliners was not wanted as a novel but as a collection of short stories. I deferred to the category judge, who said he would only accept one short story, so "The Dead" was chosen.

Seriously?

 

[thatguy]

Your selection was fine. timschochet going from almost vetoing it to saying it will get a high ranking reeks of favoritism. Meanwhile MisfitBlonde makes a spectacular outside the box selection and he gets threatened to be kicked out. Seem fair to you?

Agreed. "Um, not really sure if it's a novel or not, but you're the judge, but still, not really sure how it will stack up against other great novels. What's that? You say it is a novel? Well it's going to get an amazing rating then, screw what I said previously, top tier for sure. You're really, really great!"

 

[El Floppo]

Don't even try, Tim. You were backed by Krista before you gave any reasoning and you still haven't explained how the selection fails to meet the criteria of "play" so don't try and act like you had full support on something when you hadn't even attempted to explain anything before that point. If you are going to make blind rulings without any actual real debate then you may as well ignore anything I select in the future since I won't be paying any attention to what you have to say. Once again, your ideas of what should be selected are not being met and you pout. You can leave the selection empty or put my selection in as I will not be removing it until you are willing to show me why it does not belong in the category. What you "meant" and what became reality are two different things and the only reason you are unwilling to entertain something outside the norm is because you had your vision and it is now compromised.

Guys, I'm sorry, but I quit. Maybe this is what Misfit Blondes had in mind all along; if so, he's succeeded. If someone else wants to take over, I'll watch, but I'm not going to spend all the time and effort when one of the drafters regards me in this manner. If I am at fault, so be it. If Misfit Blondes wants to drop this and promises not to draft in this manner any longer (and I don't need to define myself further) OR if he chooses to leave, I will be back. Otherwise, no.

I'm not going anywhere. If you don't feel the need to explain yourself as 1) the draft moderator and 2) the judge of plays, then maybe you need to leave since you are clearly unwilling to be any benefit to my participation in this exercise. All I've asked is that you explain your decision based on the selection fitting into the category and you insist on using mockery as your basis of not allowing it.

So you're really neither going to quit or be reasonable? I wish you'd have made it clear 89 pages and more than a week ago that your goal wasn't winning or playing, but to ruin something for 19 other people.

This ruins nothing for me

 

[identikit]

Your selection was fine. timschochet going from almost vetoing it to saying it will get a high ranking reeks of favoritism. Meanwhile MisfitBlonde makes a spectacular outside the box selection and he gets threatened to be kicked out. Seem fair to you?

Agreed. "Um, not really sure if it's a novel or not, but you're the judge, but still, not really sure how it will stack up against other great novels. What's that? You say it is a novel? Well it's going to get an amazing rating then, screw what I said previously, top tier for sure. You're really, really great!"

 

[El Floppo]

IIRC, The Dubliners was not wanted as a novel but as a collection of short stories. I deferred to the category judge, who said he would only accept one short story, so "The Dead" was chosen. When Aesop's Fables was chosen, I thought about questioning it, but as El Floppo had no objection, neither did I.

And I have no objection to The Decameron either, but since I will be the one evaluating it, I simply raised a concern that it's difficult to compare this work to a more "normal" novel. But I will do so.

Not sure why I'd be ojecting to Aesop's Fables... can somebody help me out?

 

[El Floppo]

So...

Where are we? Who's up?

 

[Postradamus]

Your selection was fine. timschochet going from almost vetoing it to saying it will get a high ranking reeks of favoritism. Meanwhile MisfitBlonde makes a spectacular outside the box selection and he gets threatened to be kicked out. Seem fair to you?

Agreed. "Um, not really sure if it's a novel or not, but you're the judge, but still, not really sure how it will stack up against other great novels. What's that? You say it is a novel? Well it's going to get an amazing rating then, screw what I said previously, top tier for sure. You're really, really great!"

Again, I don't think that's what happened, but you are allowed your own opinion. He wanted to be sure that the pick fits within the criteria that we've established for novels (albeit not every selection is a technical novel, ex: Aesop's Fables).Maybe Novels might be better classified as long works of non-poetic fiction. I know I know, too late to change now, but GD if everyone is going to ##### about picks we need to make absolutes so there's little to argue about.

IDK I'm ####### tired of this bs...I just want to draft without people bellyaching. Obviously the Immaculate Reception doesn't fit within the understood criteria, but these others are more nebulous and deserve insightful discussion.

I hate arguing when i'm drunk.

 

[thatguy]

Your selection was fine. timschochet going from almost vetoing it to saying it will get a high ranking reeks of favoritism. Meanwhile MisfitBlonde makes a spectacular outside the box selection and he gets threatened to be kicked out. Seem fair to you?

Agreed. "Um, not really sure if it's a novel or not, but you're the judge, but still, not really sure how it will stack up against other great novels. What's that? You say it is a novel? Well it's going to get an amazing rating then, screw what I said previously, top tier for sure. You're really, really great!"

Again, I don't think that's what happened, but you are allowed your own opinion. He wanted to be sure that the pick fits within the criteria that we've established for novels (albeit not every selection is a technical novel, ex: Aesop's Fables).Maybe Novels might be better classified as long works of non-poetic fiction. I know I know, too late to change now, but GD if everyone is going to ##### about picks we need to make absolutes so there's little to argue about.

IDK I'm ####### tired of this bs...I just want to draft without people bellyaching. Obviously the Immaculate Reception doesn't fit within the understood criteria, but these others are more nebulous and deserve insightful discussion.

I hate arguing when i'm drunk.

Um, all I did was paraphrase the exchange between you and Tim. Sorry if it was lost on you.

 

[Postradamus]

Your selection was fine. timschochet going from almost vetoing it to saying it will get a high ranking reeks of favoritism. Meanwhile MisfitBlonde makes a spectacular outside the box selection and he gets threatened to be kicked out. Seem fair to you?

Agreed. "Um, not really sure if it's a novel or not, but you're the judge, but still, not really sure how it will stack up against other great novels. What's that? You say it is a novel? Well it's going to get an amazing rating then, screw what I said previously, top tier for sure. You're really, really great!"

Again, I don't think that's what happened, but you are allowed your own opinion. He wanted to be sure that the pick fits within the criteria that we've established for novels (albeit not every selection is a technical novel, ex: Aesop's Fables).Maybe Novels might be better classified as long works of non-poetic fiction. I know I know, too late to change now, but GD if everyone is going to ##### about picks we need to make absolutes so there's little to argue about.

IDK I'm ####### tired of this bs...I just want to draft without people bellyaching. Obviously the Immaculate Reception doesn't fit within the understood criteria, but these others are more nebulous and deserve insightful discussion.

I hate arguing when i'm drunk.

Um, all I did was paraphrase the exchange between you and Tim. Sorry if it was lost on you.

i think your paraphrasing was mistaken. I'm not arguing with you.I'm saying that the exchange wasn't like that. he wanted to make sure the book fit into the established parameters of the category...which it seems that it does. I was just using your post as a jumping off point, not saying you're #####ing about it. So don't get the wrong idea.

What is your take anyway? If Dubliners and Aesop's Fables were ruled to be placed into the Novel category then I see no problem here.

It's not like tim hasn't spoken his mind on everything thus far, why would he have favor with me? obviously he likes the pick, but just wanted to make sure of the parameters of the novel category...

bah I need to go. this is frustrating.

And I never said it was a novel, quite the oppposite actually.

 

[Uncle Humuna]

The winner of this draft is definitely Ahrn.

 

[Bonzai]

The winner of this draft is definitely Ahrn.

lol

 

[BobbyLayne]

8 Members: BobbyLayne, identikit, moleculo, Abrantes, BroadwayG, rodg12, mad sweeney, Uncle Humuna

Think you're up, pard.

 

[Abrantes]

8 Members: BobbyLayne, identikit, moleculo, Abrantes, BroadwayG, rodg12, mad sweeney, Uncle Humuna

Think you're up, pard.

Snap. Spaced out on whose turn it was. One sec.

 

[BobbyLayne]

8 Members: BobbyLayne, identikit, moleculo, Abrantes, BroadwayG, rodg12, mad sweeney, Uncle Humuna

Think you're up, pard.

Snap. Spaced out on whose turn it was. One sec.

No worries. Easy to see how you could get caught up in the mesmerizing dialog today.

 

[Abrantes]

19.06 Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five (Novel)

Stacking my novel category after the rest of my list got pillaged over the last two rounds. A freaky, riotous trip of a book, slightly unstuck in time. Really proud to be the one to select the first (hopefully not only) Vonnegut book, and slightly surprised that it took this long.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Nice pick, Abrantes. Slaughterhouse-Five was on my short list - but I'm deferring those picks to my so-called expert now.

Alright, moving the Staycation to southeastern PA (Hersey and Gettysburg). Won't be checking in until Monday, Special Advisor® Flysack will be picking nothing but Lit picks over the weekend. Right, pal? WTF are you doing taking my Album pick when we need 5 non-fiction, 4 more novels, 4 more plays, another poem? 14 Lit picks to go...come on, Man!



OK, going off the reservation slightly here. I was going to take one of my patented Modern Library novels here - the ones timschochet always says are unreadable - but instead I'm going to fill a single shot category. Might be #1, or it might be a total fluke record that ends up in the middle of the pack. All I know is sports have been a popular and central part of western society for over a century, but this only happened once in a professional league.

19.07 (367th pick) - 100 Points Scored in an NBA Game - Sports Record

Wilt Chamberlain

On March 2, 1962, Wilt Chamberlain set the NBA single-game scoringrecord by tallying 100 points for the Philadelphia Warriors in a 169-147 victory over the New York Knicks.

Not 98 points, not 102, but a nice, round 100 -- an imposing record set by a most imposing player.

Chamberlain was a gargantuan force in the NBA, a player of Bunyanesque stature who seemed to overshadow all around him. He was a dominant offensive force, unstoppable on his way to the basket, yet he was also a fine all-around athlete who took pride in developing the all-around skills to compete with players a half-foot shorter.

He certainly was unstoppable that night in Hershey, Pa., where the Warriors played a few of their "home" games in order to attract additional fans. With New York's starting center, Phil Jordan, sidelined by the flu, Chamberlain could not be contained by Darrall Imhoff and Cleveland Buckner. He scored 23 points in the first quarter and had 41 by halftime, then tallied 28 in the third quarter, when the fans began to chant, "Give It To Wilt! Give It To Wilt!"

That's exactly what the Warriors did, feeding Chamberlain at every opportunity in the fourth quarter. The Knicks tried fouling other Philadelphia players to keep the ball away from Chamberlain, but the Warriors countered by committing fouls of their own to get the ball back.

Finally, Chamberlain took a pass from Joe Ruklick and hit a short shot with 46 seconds left to give him 100 points. Fans raced onto the court and play was halted as Chamberlain went to the lockerroom, where PR man Harvey Pollack scrawled "100" on a piece of paper and had Chamberlain hold it up for photographers.

In obliterating his previous NBA scoring record of 78 points set less than three months earlier, Chamberlain shot 36-for-63 from the field and 28-for-32 from the foul line, a remarkable feat for a man whose career free throw percentage was a weak .511.

"As time goes by," Chamberlain reflected more than three decades later, "I feel more and more a part of that 100-point game. It has become my handle, and I've come to realize just what I did."

Chamberlain went on to average an NBA-record 50.4 ppg in the 1961-62 season and became the only player to surpass 4,000 points in one season with 4,029. He also led the league in rebounding with 25.7 rpg and was second in field goal percentage at .506.

Amazingly, Chamberlain also averaged 48.5 minutes per game-quite a feat when you consider that an NBA game lasts only 48 minutes. The Warriors played a total of 10 overtime periods in seven games that season, and Chamberlain was on the court for 3,882 of a possible 3,890 minutes. Of the team's 80 games, he went the distance in a record 79 of them.

Have a great weekend, everyone!

 

[Genedoc]

19.06 Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five (Novel)

Stacking my novel category after the rest of my list got pillaged over the last two rounds. A freaky, riotous trip of a book, slightly unstuck in time. Really proud to be the one to select the first (hopefully not only) Vonnegut book, and slightly surprised that it took this long.

Don Quixote, Huck Finn, and Pride/Prejudice vs.

Catch-22, One Hundred Years of Solitude, and Slaughterhouse Five

I like ours a little better, but your collection is closer to ours than I thought. Going to be a fight to the finish!

 

[Abrantes]

19.06 Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five (Novel)

Stacking my novel category after the rest of my list got pillaged over the last two rounds. A freaky, riotous trip of a book, slightly unstuck in time. Really proud to be the one to select the first (hopefully not only) Vonnegut book, and slightly surprised that it took this long.

Don Quixote, Huck Finn, and Pride/Prejudice vs.

Catch-22, One Hundred Years of Solitude, and Slaughterhouse Five

I like ours a little better, but your collection is closer to ours than I thought. Going to be a fight to the finish!

Time to start working on my smear campaign for the later rounds...

 

[thatguy]

Your selection was fine. timschochet going from almost vetoing it to saying it will get a high ranking reeks of favoritism. Meanwhile MisfitBlonde makes a spectacular outside the box selection and he gets threatened to be kicked out. Seem fair to you?

Agreed. "Um, not really sure if it's a novel or not, but you're the judge, but still, not really sure how it will stack up against other great novels. What's that? You say it is a novel? Well it's going to get an amazing rating then, screw what I said previously, top tier for sure. You're really, really great!"

Again, I don't think that's what happened, but you are allowed your own opinion. He wanted to be sure that the pick fits within the criteria that we've established for novels (albeit not every selection is a technical novel, ex: Aesop's Fables).Maybe Novels might be better classified as long works of non-poetic fiction. I know I know, too late to change now, but GD if everyone is going to ##### about picks we need to make absolutes so there's little to argue about.

IDK I'm ####### tired of this bs...I just want to draft without people bellyaching. Obviously the Immaculate Reception doesn't fit within the understood criteria, but these others are more nebulous and deserve insightful discussion.

I hate arguing when i'm drunk.

Um, all I did was paraphrase the exchange between you and Tim. Sorry if it was lost on you.

i think your paraphrasing was mistaken. I'm not arguing with you.I'm saying that the exchange wasn't like that. he wanted to make sure the book fit into the established parameters of the category...which it seems that it does. I was just using your post as a jumping off point, not saying you're #####ing about it. So don't get the wrong idea.

What is your take anyway? If Dubliners and Aesop's Fables were ruled to be placed into the Novel category then I see no problem here.

It's not like tim hasn't spoken his mind on everything thus far, why would he have favor with me? obviously he likes the pick, but just wanted to make sure of the parameters of the novel category...

bah I need to go. this is frustrating.

And I never said it was a novel, quite the oppposite actually.

I'm fine with it being placed in that category. I'm more referring to Tim saying he wasn't sure how it would stack up at first, and then backing off and saying it will be ranked very highly. Seems inconsistent to me. But I'm not trying to #####. I was just trying to be funny more than anything.

 

[thatguy]

Nice pick, Abrantes. Slaughterhouse-Five was on my short list - but I'm deferring those picks to my so-called expert now.

Alright, moving the Staycation to southeastern PA (Hersey and Gettysburg). Won't be checking in until Monday, Special Advisor® Flysack will be picking nothing but Lit picks over the weekend. Right, pal? WTF are you doing taking my Album pick when we need 5 non-fiction, 4 more novels, 4 more plays, another poem? 14 Lit picks to go...come on, Man!



OK, going off the reservation slightly here. I was going to take one of my patented Modern Library novels here - the ones timschochet always says are unreadable - but instead I'm going to fill a single shot category. Might be #1, or it might be a total fluke record that ends up in the middle of the pack. All I know is sports have been a popular and central part of western society for over a century, but this only happened once in a professional league.

19.07 (367th pick) - 100 Points Scored in an NBA Game - Sports Record

Wilt Chamberlain

On March 2, 1962, Wilt Chamberlain set the NBA single-game scoringrecord by tallying 100 points for the Philadelphia Warriors in a 169-147 victory over the New York Knicks.

Not 98 points, not 102, but a nice, round 100 -- an imposing record set by a most imposing player.

Chamberlain was a gargantuan force in the NBA, a player of Bunyanesque stature who seemed to overshadow all around him. He was a dominant offensive force, unstoppable on his way to the basket, yet he was also a fine all-around athlete who took pride in developing the all-around skills to compete with players a half-foot shorter.

He certainly was unstoppable that night in Hershey, Pa., where the Warriors played a few of their "home" games in order to attract additional fans. With New York's starting center, Phil Jordan, sidelined by the flu, Chamberlain could not be contained by Darrall Imhoff and Cleveland Buckner. He scored 23 points in the first quarter and had 41 by halftime, then tallied 28 in the third quarter, when the fans began to chant, "Give It To Wilt! Give It To Wilt!"

That's exactly what the Warriors did, feeding Chamberlain at every opportunity in the fourth quarter. The Knicks tried fouling other Philadelphia players to keep the ball away from Chamberlain, but the Warriors countered by committing fouls of their own to get the ball back.

Finally, Chamberlain took a pass from Joe Ruklick and hit a short shot with 46 seconds left to give him 100 points. Fans raced onto the court and play was halted as Chamberlain went to the lockerroom, where PR man Harvey Pollack scrawled "100" on a piece of paper and had Chamberlain hold it up for photographers.

In obliterating his previous NBA scoring record of 78 points set less than three months earlier, Chamberlain shot 36-for-63 from the field and 28-for-32 from the foul line, a remarkable feat for a man whose career free throw percentage was a weak .511.

"As time goes by," Chamberlain reflected more than three decades later, "I feel more and more a part of that 100-point game. It has become my handle, and I've come to realize just what I did."

Chamberlain went on to average an NBA-record 50.4 ppg in the 1961-62 season and became the only player to surpass 4,000 points in one season with 4,029. He also led the league in rebounding with 25.7 rpg and was second in field goal percentage at .506.

Amazingly, Chamberlain also averaged 48.5 minutes per game-quite a feat when you consider that an NBA game lasts only 48 minutes. The Warriors played a total of 10 overtime periods in seven games that season, and Chamberlain was on the court for 3,882 of a possible 3,890 minutes. Of the team's 80 games, he went the distance in a record 79 of them.

Have a great weekend, everyone!

Great pick BL and also you suck. I'd been sitting on this one for awhile... too long apparently.

 

[Abrantes]

Nice pick, Abrantes. Slaughterhouse-Five was on my short list - but I'm deferring those picks to my so-called expert now.

Alright, moving the Staycation to southeastern PA (Hersey and Gettysburg). Won't be checking in until Monday, Special Advisor® Flysack will be picking nothing but Lit picks over the weekend. Right, pal? WTF are you doing taking my Album pick when we need 5 non-fiction, 4 more novels, 4 more plays, another poem? 14 Lit picks to go...come on, Man!



OK, going off the reservation slightly here. I was going to take one of my patented Modern Library novels here - the ones timschochet always says are unreadable - but instead I'm going to fill a single shot category. Might be #1, or it might be a total fluke record that ends up in the middle of the pack. All I know is sports have been a popular and central part of western society for over a century, but this only happened once in a professional league.

19.07 (367th pick) - 100 Points Scored in an NBA Game - Sports Record

Wilt Chamberlain

Great pick BL and also you suck. I'd been sitting on this one for awhile... too long apparently.

That was the record I wanted for my list, but waited a little too long. Truly iconic.

 

[Uncle Humuna]

Nice pick, Abrantes. Slaughterhouse-Five was on my short list - but I'm deferring those picks to my so-called expert now.

Alright, moving the Staycation to southeastern PA (Hersey and Gettysburg). Won't be checking in until Monday, Special Advisor® Flysack will be picking nothing but Lit picks over the weekend. Right, pal? WTF are you doing taking my Album pick when we need 5 non-fiction, 4 more novels, 4 more plays, another poem? 14 Lit picks to go...come on, Man!



OK, going off the reservation slightly here. I was going to take one of my patented Modern Library novels here - the ones timschochet always says are unreadable - but instead I'm going to fill a single shot category. Might be #1, or it might be a total fluke record that ends up in the middle of the pack. All I know is sports have been a popular and central part of western society for over a century, but this only happened once in a professional league.

19.07 (367th pick) - 100 Points Scored in an NBA Game - Sports Record

Wilt Chamberlain

Great pick BL and also you suck. I'd been sitting on this one for awhile... too long apparently.

That was the record I wanted for my list, but waited a little too long. Truly iconic.

I would be surprised if this wasn't on everbody's short list for the cat.It's an amazing accomplishment (sports-wise).

 

[wikkidpissah]

Nice pick, Abrantes. Slaughterhouse-Five was on my short list - but I'm deferring those picks to my so-called expert now.

Alright, moving the Staycation to southeastern PA (Hersey and Gettysburg). Won't be checking in until Monday, Special Advisor® Flysack will be picking nothing but Lit picks over the weekend. Right, pal? WTF are you doing taking my Album pick when we need 5 non-fiction, 4 more novels, 4 more plays, another poem? 14 Lit picks to go...come on, Man!



OK, going off the reservation slightly here. I was going to take one of my patented Modern Library novels here - the ones timschochet always says are unreadable - but instead I'm going to fill a single shot category. Might be #1, or it might be a total fluke record that ends up in the middle of the pack. All I know is sports have been a popular and central part of western society for over a century, but this only happened once in a professional league.

19.07 (367th pick) - 100 Points Scored in an NBA Game - Sports Record

Wilt Chamberlain

On March 2, 1962, Wilt Chamberlain set the NBA single-game scoringrecord by tallying 100 points for the Philadelphia Warriors in a 169-147 victory over the New York Knicks.

Not 98 points, not 102, but a nice, round 100 -- an imposing record set by a most imposing player.

Chamberlain was a gargantuan force in the NBA, a player of Bunyanesque stature who seemed to overshadow all around him. He was a dominant offensive force, unstoppable on his way to the basket, yet he was also a fine all-around athlete who took pride in developing the all-around skills to compete with players a half-foot shorter.

He certainly was unstoppable that night in Hershey, Pa., where the Warriors played a few of their "home" games in order to attract additional fans. With New York's starting center, Phil Jordan, sidelined by the flu, Chamberlain could not be contained by Darrall Imhoff and Cleveland Buckner. He scored 23 points in the first quarter and had 41 by halftime, then tallied 28 in the third quarter, when the fans began to chant, "Give It To Wilt! Give It To Wilt!"

That's exactly what the Warriors did, feeding Chamberlain at every opportunity in the fourth quarter. The Knicks tried fouling other Philadelphia players to keep the ball away from Chamberlain, but the Warriors countered by committing fouls of their own to get the ball back.

Finally, Chamberlain took a pass from Joe Ruklick and hit a short shot with 46 seconds left to give him 100 points. Fans raced onto the court and play was halted as Chamberlain went to the lockerroom, where PR man Harvey Pollack scrawled "100" on a piece of paper and had Chamberlain hold it up for photographers.

In obliterating his previous NBA scoring record of 78 points set less than three months earlier, Chamberlain shot 36-for-63 from the field and 28-for-32 from the foul line, a remarkable feat for a man whose career free throw percentage was a weak .511.

"As time goes by," Chamberlain reflected more than three decades later, "I feel more and more a part of that 100-point game. It has become my handle, and I've come to realize just what I did."

Chamberlain went on to average an NBA-record 50.4 ppg in the 1961-62 season and became the only player to surpass 4,000 points in one season with 4,029. He also led the league in rebounding with 25.7 rpg and was second in field goal percentage at .506.

Amazingly, Chamberlain also averaged 48.5 minutes per game-quite a feat when you consider that an NBA game lasts only 48 minutes. The Warriors played a total of 10 overtime periods in seven games that season, and Chamberlain was on the court for 3,882 of a possible 3,890 minutes. Of the team's 80 games, he went the distance in a record 79 of them.

Have a great weekend, everyone!

Great pick BL and also you suck. I'd been sitting on this one for awhile... too long apparently.

17,849th person to sit on Wilt.

 

[Mister CIA]

Nice pick, Abrantes. Slaughterhouse-Five was on my short list - but I'm deferring those picks to my so-called expert now.

Alright, moving the Staycation to southeastern PA (Hersey and Gettysburg). Won't be checking in until Monday, Special Advisor® Flysack will be picking nothing but Lit picks over the weekend. Right, pal? WTF are you doing taking my Album pick when we need 5 non-fiction, 4 more novels, 4 more plays, another poem? 14 Lit picks to go...come on, Man!



OK, going off the reservation slightly here. I was going to take one of my patented Modern Library novels here - the ones timschochet always says are unreadable - but instead I'm going to fill a single shot category. Might be #1, or it might be a total fluke record that ends up in the middle of the pack. All I know is sports have been a popular and central part of western society for over a century, but this only happened once in a professional league.

19.07 (367th pick) - 100 Points Scored in an NBA Game - Sports Record

Wilt Chamberlain

Great pick BL and also you suck. I'd been sitting on this one for awhile... too long apparently.

That was the record I wanted for my list, but waited a little too long. Truly iconic.

I would be surprised if this wasn't on everbody's short list for the cat.It's an amazing accomplishment (sports-wise).

I have this one down as the second greatest sports record ... by Wilt.

 

[Uncle Humuna]

Nice pick, Abrantes. Slaughterhouse-Five was on my short list - but I'm deferring those picks to my so-called expert now.

Alright, moving the Staycation to southeastern PA (Hersey and Gettysburg). Won't be checking in until Monday, Special Advisor® Flysack will be picking nothing but Lit picks over the weekend. Right, pal? WTF are you doing taking my Album pick when we need 5 non-fiction, 4 more novels, 4 more plays, another poem? 14 Lit picks to go...come on, Man!



OK, going off the reservation slightly here. I was going to take one of my patented Modern Library novels here - the ones timschochet always says are unreadable - but instead I'm going to fill a single shot category. Might be #1, or it might be a total fluke record that ends up in the middle of the pack. All I know is sports have been a popular and central part of western society for over a century, but this only happened once in a professional league.

19.07 (367th pick) - 100 Points Scored in an NBA Game - Sports Record

Wilt Chamberlain

On March 2, 1962, Wilt Chamberlain set the NBA single-game scoringrecord by tallying 100 points for the Philadelphia Warriors in a 169-147 victory over the New York Knicks.

Not 98 points, not 102, but a nice, round 100 -- an imposing record set by a most imposing player.

Chamberlain was a gargantuan force in the NBA, a player of Bunyanesque stature who seemed to overshadow all around him. He was a dominant offensive force, unstoppable on his way to the basket, yet he was also a fine all-around athlete who took pride in developing the all-around skills to compete with players a half-foot shorter.

He certainly was unstoppable that night in Hershey, Pa., where the Warriors played a few of their "home" games in order to attract additional fans. With New York's starting center, Phil Jordan, sidelined by the flu, Chamberlain could not be contained by Darrall Imhoff and Cleveland Buckner. He scored 23 points in the first quarter and had 41 by halftime, then tallied 28 in the third quarter, when the fans began to chant, "Give It To Wilt! Give It To Wilt!"

That's exactly what the Warriors did, feeding Chamberlain at every opportunity in the fourth quarter. The Knicks tried fouling other Philadelphia players to keep the ball away from Chamberlain, but the Warriors countered by committing fouls of their own to get the ball back.

Finally, Chamberlain took a pass from Joe Ruklick and hit a short shot with 46 seconds left to give him 100 points. Fans raced onto the court and play was halted as Chamberlain went to the lockerroom, where PR man Harvey Pollack scrawled "100" on a piece of paper and had Chamberlain hold it up for photographers.

In obliterating his previous NBA scoring record of 78 points set less than three months earlier, Chamberlain shot 36-for-63 from the field and 28-for-32 from the foul line, a remarkable feat for a man whose career free throw percentage was a weak .511.

"As time goes by," Chamberlain reflected more than three decades later, "I feel more and more a part of that 100-point game. It has become my handle, and I've come to realize just what I did."

Chamberlain went on to average an NBA-record 50.4 ppg in the 1961-62 season and became the only player to surpass 4,000 points in one season with 4,029. He also led the league in rebounding with 25.7 rpg and was second in field goal percentage at .506.

Amazingly, Chamberlain also averaged 48.5 minutes per game-quite a feat when you consider that an NBA game lasts only 48 minutes. The Warriors played a total of 10 overtime periods in seven games that season, and Chamberlain was on the court for 3,882 of a possible 3,890 minutes. Of the team's 80 games, he went the distance in a record 79 of them.

Have a great weekend, everyone!

Great pick BL and also you suck. I'd been sitting on this one for awhile... too long apparently.

17,849th person to sit on Wilt.

eta->who knew Abrantes was a spinner

 

[RudiStein]

Can someone explain how Misfit's pick would have "ruined" the draft?

What if he had taken "Seven Brides for Dracula" by Tim Kelly? A wonderful play the I performed in 7th grade. Would that have ruined the draft as well?

 

[Postradamus]

i think your paraphrasing was mistaken. I'm not arguing with you.I'm saying that the exchange wasn't like that. he wanted to make sure the book fit into the established parameters of the category...which it seems that it does. I was just using your post as a jumping off point, not saying you're #####ing about it. So don't get the wrong idea.What is your take anyway? If Dubliners and Aesop's Fables were ruled to be placed into the Novel category then I see no problem here.It's not like tim hasn't spoken his mind on everything thus far, why would he have favor with me? obviously he likes the pick, but just wanted to make sure of the parameters of the novel category...bah I need to go. this is frustrating.And I never said it was a novel, quite the oppposite actually.

I'm fine with it being placed in that category. I'm more referring to Tim saying he wasn't sure how it would stack up at first, and then backing off and saying it will be ranked very highly. Seems inconsistent to me. But I'm not trying to #####. I was just trying to be funny more than anything.

yeah i get where ur coming from. i've been druk since 6..bear with me :baglove the ick abrantes. was targeting SH5.ET:l CAN'T EBEN ESIT RIFGHT

 

[chet]

US Constitution 1st overall? Please.

 

[Frostillicus]

This might be un-American, but I've always considered Rocky to be extremely overrated. I can't stand any of them.

this is a good posting

 

[Frostillicus]

16.08 The Raven - Edgar Allan Poe (Poem)

this is a steal

 

[Yankee23Fan]

I'm still not sure if I loved Slaughterhouse Five or not. It was a great read, story moved nicely, main character had his moments, but when I finished I didn't have the sense that I just read something great.

 

[timschochet]

Good morning. I want to apologize for my part in all of the mess yesterday. Though I'm not responsible for the attempts made to get under my skin, I AM responsible for overreacting to it. I'll try not to let that happen again.

Several people, however, were very kind and supportive in remarks made both here and by PM, and it is really appreciated.