Posted in Hobbies & Interests, Nick, Predictions, Pro Football, tagged Oakland Raiders, Russell Wilson, Seattle Seahawks on September 2, 2012 | Leave a Comment »
Last night, Joel Aro and I went to the Seahawks final pre-season game at Century Link Field. The Seahawks beat the Oakland Raiders 21-3 (more) to finish the pre-season a perfect 4-0. The Seahawks begin the regular season next week in Arizona. Rookie Russell Wilson will start at quarterback.
A view from our seats.
I’m going to go out on a limb with these predictions. The Seahawks:
(1) will win eleven (11) games this year; and
(2) will win one playoff game.
You read it here first.
Posted in Family Outings, Finn, Friends, Hobbies & Interests, Holidays, Kids, Movies, Nick, Predictions, Reese, Rhonda, Snow Sports, Thanksgiving on November 28, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
My favorite four-day span of the year has come and gone. Thanksgiving weekend 2011 is officially behind us.
Family Joffe joined ...
We got it off to a great start on Thursday with the traditional Thanksgiving fare — lots of football and lots of food. This year the family Joffe joined us at casa de Jenkins. Regrettably Uncle Cole, who had been staying with us, opted out of the proceedings. Nevertheless the seven of us had a great time — although no one was particularly successful at keeping their food intake down. With Ronnie again doing a fantastic job in the kitchen (and Beth bringing some goodies of her own), that was understandable.
family Jenkins for Thanksgiving 2011.
(Black) Friday was basically a lay around day. Ronnie made it to Target by 7 am — why, I don’t know. I read a lot and parented. I also made it to my second-ever Sharkey poker night — this one at Rainier Golf and Country Club. I played for all of about thirty minutes — and made $156. I think that’s the key to poker — just don’t play.
One year on and we still can't get all the kids to look at the camera.
On Saturday I joined Harald and Isabel up at Snoqualmie Summit for the first skiing of the season. It was my first time out on my new skis and poles. Worked well if I do say so. Unfortunately Cole decided he’d had enough of Seattle — or more particularly, living in casa de Jenkins. We wish him well back in Phoenix.
First pic with my new iPhone 4s.
On Sunday we attended Cookies and Cocoa with Mrs. Claus at Sand Point. The kids got their pictures taken with Mrs. Claus and we all decorated cookies and had hot chocolate in the dining room. I wound the weekend down by watching the Seahawks give one away to the Redskins and then saw George Clooney’s “The Descendants” with Jeff Benezra at The Guild 45th. Prediction: Clooney and his co-star Shailene Woodley will receive Oscar nominations for Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor, respectively.
The kids with Mrs. Claus at Sand Point CC.
Save the Seahawks’ debacle, not a bad weekend if I do say so.
Posted in Movies, Nick, Predictions on August 8, 2011 | 1 Comment »
Since my ill-fated prediction that Inglorious Basterds would clean up at the Oscars, I’ve shied away from guessing the awards. I don’t really know what Hollywood thinks makes a great movie, and I’m not so sure greatness matters so much as personal popularity — or lack of it. (See Mel Gibson’s Passion of The Christ.)
Best movie I've seen in a long while.
But I’m going to go out on a limb again. Sarah’s Key, the amazing story of a reporter (Kristin Scott Thomas) who traces her would-be Paris’s home back to Nazi-occupied France in 1942, should make at least some noise at the next Oscars. I saw it last night at The Guild on 45th, and afterwards I literally raced home to hug my kids. Always a good thing.
If I were in the Academy I’d vote it Best Picture.
Unfortunately, given what I know about these things, that means it probably won’t win.
Posted in Clothes, Finn, Golf, Hobbies & Interests, Kids, Nick, Predictions, Professional, Reese, tagged Black Fly Outfitters, buffs, Martin Kaymer, Rick Young on March 9, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
A few weeks ago, I predicted that Martin Kaymer’s choice of neckwear at the 2011 World Matchplay Championship would spark a new fashion trend in the golf world.
Early signs are that I might be right. First Rick Young reported that Vaughn Cochran, who designed Kaymer’s buff (for fly fishermen, mind you), reported sales of 1,000 or so in six days, up from the usual seven or so per week. (More.) The folks at GolfWeek are reporting that, according to Cochran, the world’s leading buff manufacturer is already “ramp(ing) up designs for golf community.” (More.) On Wednesday my buddy Jeff Benezra reported to me that Bellevue Community College’s golf team was out at his club — and a few of the top players were wearing buffs. Then there was this:
Little did the world's best golfer know what he'd done.
Oh, and Daddy, who owned just one buff pre-Kaymer, now has a new “buff drawer.”
Posted in Nick, Predictions, Ruminations on March 2, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
One for the time capsule. Guest columnist Fareed Zakaria predicted in this week’s TIME that America’s best days are behind us.
Although I don’t agree with his opinion in total, I happen to think that, generally speaking, he’s right. Electing Barack Obama didn’t help matters. (More.)
I hope we’re wrong. But it’ll be interesting to see if how America looks twenty years from now, if/when Reese and Finn stumble on this post.
Posted in Clothes, Golf, Hobbies & Interests, Nick, Playing, Predictions, Professional, tagged Bubba Watson, buff, buffs, Martin Kaymer, Sahalie, snood, snoods, World Match Play Championship on February 26, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
This afternoon, German golfer Martin Kaymer donned what he called a “snood” in his semi-final match against Bubba Watson at the World Matchplay Championship. (Click here to buy.) Someone dubbed him the “Dude with the ‘tude in the Snood.” It’s kind of a pseudo-scarf apparently donned by a few prominent European soccer players. As it turns out, its actually a called a “buff” and its made for, among others, fly fishermen. (More.) Golf commentators were writing about it before the Watson-Kaymer match was even over.
Snood or buff, I look for these to be the next big thing in the world of golf fashion.
While I doubt many (if any) Tour pros will sport these athletic ascots anytime soon (too obviously copycatted), I’m guessing that sexually-secure weekend warriors everywhere will. I’m guessing that Titleist and Taylor Made/Adidas will be making them within 2-3 months. I’m guessing, too, that they’ll be quite the hot topic among country club fashionistas. The camps will divide between those who think real mean ought not wear them — count Manchester United’s Sir Alex Ferguson in that camp — and those who think they just look pretty cool.
I’m in the latter camp.
In the interest of demonstrating that I’m not a completely mindless trend-following lemming, I’ve been wearing these things for the past month or so. Here’s proof:
With the kids last week. Check out the neckwear.
I got mine on Sahalie.com. They’re supposed to be unisex and Sahalie has them listed as a men’s accessory, but in the pics they’re being worn by women. (Memo to Sahalie’s merchandising department: you may want to rethink that one.)
If golfers can wear painter’s hats, they can — and will — certainly wear these.
Especially when the world number one is wearing them.
UPDATE March 5, 2011: Rick Young over on ScoreGolf.com also predicts we’ll be seeing buffs in golf shops sooner rather than later. (More.)
Posted in Betcha.com, Fantasy Sports, Golf, Hobbies & Interests, Predictions, Professional, Ruminations on June 21, 2010 | Leave a Comment »
Maybe it’s a good thing Betcha.com lived such a short life. Because I had a good many predictions about this past U.S. Open that I would have posted on Betcha. And had they have been accepted, I would have lost every one of them:
That’s 0 fer 10. At $5 a pop — my comfort zone for wagers, even nonbinding ones — that’s $50. Even a broken watch is right once in a while. Maybe if I’d have listed a couple more bets I would have nailed one.
Not putting Graeme McDowell in my top 5 was one of many mistakes I would have made had I listed bets on Betcha.com.
Those losses were hypothetical. Betcha.com does not exist, thus I did not list those bets for others to accept and so I did not lose them. If I had, I could have always hit the “I wanna opt out” button and saved a few bucks for Father’s Day dinner. My losses in fantasy golf, however, were real. For the second straight stanza I (aka NickKnowsGolf in my league) came into the final tournament with a decent lead only to blow it on the final days. During the winter term I need Stephen Ames and Brandt Snedeker to play like Tour pros during the final round of the Arnold Palmer Invitational. Instead they shot a cumulative +7 and I lost the Winter stanza in our Yahoo! fantasy golf league. This time I just needed things to go okay. Instead I had Tiger on the bench when he shot 65 and started him when he shot 74. Had I started him on Saturday instead of Sunday I would have won. I did not.
Had I have started Tiger Woods on Saturday (pictured) instead of Sunday I would have won my fantasy golf league.
The irony as it relates to Betcha.com is again not lost. We play fantasy golf for real money — and the rules of the game do not give us the right to take it back if things go sideways. I think there’s something to the tune of $750 in our league, meaning I actually lost about $100 yesterday. The $50 I put in the pot is also gone and, unlike Betcha, I have no right to take it back.
Watching the Open yesterday rooting for my guys I couldn’t help but thinking I was actually gambling. Yet fantasy sports is not gambling, and the only guy who has ever challenged fantasy sports as gambling got thrown out of court.
Wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that so many people do it and to hold fantasy sports was gambling would mean that half the nation’s red-blooded males would be guilty of online gambling?
Nah, that would be result-oriented judging. Judges would never do that.
Posted in Betcha.com, Golf, Liberty (Or Not), Predictions, tagged Bo Van Pelt, Brian Davis, Jim Furyk, Luke Donald, Phil Mickelson, Sergio Garcia, Steve Stricker, Tiger Woods, Tom Watson, U.S. Open, Vijay Singh on June 17, 2010 | Leave a Comment »
Tomorrow’s U.S. Open has me thinking about Betcha.com — as if I needed another reason (1I2). Mostly what could have been, and what would have been if I had a place to hook up with fellow golf enthusiasts. I have a few bets in mind:
Steve Stricker (shown here in a shirt I own) is my pick to win.
So those are my gut calls. The idea behind Betcha.com was to give guys like me a place to post non-binding bet offers like these or anything that came to mind in hopes that some golf fan elsewhere would find the offers interesting. No such site existed. So long as they liked the opposite side and thought the chances of me exercising my opt-out right were small, they’d take the chance of nonpayment and bet anyway. Alas I cannot and, if my prediction proves out, never will. Because by offering such nonbinding bet offers I would be a professional gambler and thus, a federal racketeer.
I’ll have to be content to record my predictions for posterity’s sake and see how they shake out.
Back on Monday to see how I did.
Posted in Betcha.com, How Come's, Pop Culture, Predictions on June 16, 2010 | Leave a Comment »
Another “you gotta be f—in’ kiddin’ me” on the Betcha.com front.
First it was getting set up and then extradited to Louisiana as a fugitive from a state I hadn’t been to since 1994.
Then it was losing in court based on an argument the state didn’t even raise.
Now Americans can lose the rent money playing video games -- and no one will bat an eye.
Then it was seeing a state appellate court judge hold in dissent that Betcha bettors were gambling because, inter alia, we hosted our servers in Canada.
Then it was seeing the Washington State Gambling Commission try to sneak language into the definition of gambling that would kill Betcha.com before the courts had a chance to rule — and do it in the budget.
Then it was watching the WSGC tell a friend that it was okay to bet on movies because the sites that offered the product called the bets “futures” — even though players had no right to opt out if they lost.
Then it was watching another company literally steal our name and basically copy our business model. (No links on that one by design.)
Then it was watching the Washington State Supreme Court — well, I’ve said enough about that. (1I2)
The latest? A buddy of mine gave me the heads up that Virgin Group is getting into the gaming business. The LA-based megacorp is apparently going to offer a website whereby players can compete against one another in video gaming for real money. They call them “challenges” instead of “bets.” And unlike Betcha.com, they do not have the right to opt out of their losses.
As “you gotta be f–kin’ kiddin’ me’s” go, this one isn’t so bad. Virgin is a private company, it has the right to do what it wants, and as the betting that happens is on games of skill, the betting is not gambling, at least as defined by Washington state law. Nevertheless, Betcha.com basically got shut down for violating the spirit of the law — even the State’s lawyers admitted the issue was, at worst, unclear. We made that point to the state Supreme Court in our supplemental brief, but no one brought it up.
Will the WSGC invoke the same “spirit” against a massive corporation like Virgin?
“Betcha” it won’t.
Posted in Betcha.com, Law, Predictions, tagged Washington State Supreme Court on May 31, 2010 | 1 Comment »
I just can’t get Thursday’s debacle before the Washington State Supreme Court out of my head. The thought of losing what should have been a slam dunk is really starting to sink in — not to mention the reality of a long stint in jail, no doubt insisted on by a prosecutor in exchange for not going after everyone ever associated with Betcha.com. It doesn’t help that it’s been raining straight for about three days.
My crystal ball does not show good things.
My prediction: we lose 7-2 or worse. George Telquist, who argued the case, thinks we’ll win 6-3. Joel Aro, a buddy of mine who said he would never use Betcha.com precisely because he understood that he may not be paid if he won — and whose position was on the record at page 49 of the clerk’s papers — predicted a 9-0 loss after watching the hearing on tvw.
Hopefully it won’t be that bad, but right now I’m not feeling good. At least a few of the justices seemed persuaded by the idea that bets made on Betcha.com were no different than ones made in illegal gambling venues, at least in terms of their enforceability. The logic:
Illegal gambling debts are unenforceable.
Bets made on Betcha are unenforceable.
Therefore, bets made on Betcha are illegal gambling.
Or
If 1 then 2
2
Therefore 2 is 1.
Or
Giraffes are tall.
I’m tall.
Therefore, I’m a giraffe.
Or even better:
Illegal gamblers who don’t get paid are S.O.L.
Bettors on Betcha who don’t get paid are S.O.L.
Therefore, bettors on Betcha are illegal gamblers.
The giraffe logic (or illogic) still applies.
That isn’t the only problem with that reasoning. First, illegal gambling debts are nothing more than unpaid obligations — that is why they are called “debts.” It just so happens that the legislature has decided to make the court house unavailable to unpaid gamblers. Unpaid wagers on Betcha.com are not debts — that’s the point! Betcha bettors have no obligation to pay, just as patrons of these new pay-what-you-want-of-nothing-at-all coffee shops have no obligation to pay. So if the legislature changed the law tomorrow to make illegal gambling debts enforceable, it would benefit unpaid gamblers, but it still would not benefit bettors on Betcha.com: legislation does not alter business models. All of these points we made in our briefs — the first points at pages 15-16 and pages 19-20 footnote 50 of our supplemental brief, the second at page 30 of our appellate brief. I’m just not sure anyone actually read them.
The other problem is that said reasoning begs the question. It may be that illegal gambling debts are unenforceable. But the very question presented in this case is whether a loss on Betcha is an illegal gambling debt. If it isn’t, then losses on Betcha.com are enforceable as we insisted in our lower court briefs — it’s just that because there was no promise to pay there is nothing to enforce. (The good ol’ illusory promise.) If you just assume the answer to the question then of course it is. Never in a million years would I have thought judges would just assume the answer to the question.
I don’t feel much better about the bookmaking issue. There were no shortage of justices who seemed to think that the charging of nonrefundable fees was a “gotcha” point. Of course, as we explained ad naseum in our briefs, that’s wrong. As for the argument that it would be absurd to conclude that I could be a bookmaker even though no one was gambling — well, no one seemed to buy it. I know Washington state courts follow the absurdity doctrine — Judge Elaine Houghton invoked it in her dissent in Division Two. Maybe it doesn’t apply when it would make the State the loser.
I have to give Assistant Attorney General Jerry Ackerman a lot of credit for his performance. I do not like Mr. Ackerman and he does not like me. I’ve learned in the last year that he personally consulted with the Gambling Commission in connection with the Louisiana draw-and-quarter job on me — and told them how to properly bet so the trumped up charges would stick. All, by the way, while he was litigating the underlying dec action! Be that as it may, he did a nice job confusing the issue and basically ignoring just about every one of our arguments and rebuttals.
And much to what will undoubtedly be the Jenkins family’s eternal chagrin, no one called him on it.
