Wrestling LIVE THREAD: Penn State vs. Iowa

Agoodnap

Well-Known Member
Sep 27, 2015
3,203
4,513
1
you not following the conversation? i'm saying it should be illegal, not that it is and it wasn't called.
What about head snaps? Someone could get really hurt if their head gets thrown unto the floor. Should they be illegal?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Dogwelder

js8793

Well-Known Member
Dec 4, 2018
1,735
3,174
1
Ok, I’ll take your word for it. But you obviously see why eyebrows would raise if you decide the day after a guy on your team was subject to a move, suddenly you don’t like torquing on joints.
There have been plenty of Lee arm bars, literally dozens every year, where we could have had that discussion. Some with opponents yelling in pain while an insane man insisting he just doesn’t like tough wrestling.
that result last night didn't have a huge impact on my thinking. warner was cooked. and i don't think dean is dirty or anything either.
 

js8793

Well-Known Member
Dec 4, 2018
1,735
3,174
1
What about head snaps? Someone could get really hurt if their head gets thrown unto the floor. Should they be illegal?
I’m following along just fine, how do you think guys get shoulder injuries? If your criteria is preventing all injuries, there won’t be much left to our sport.
you guys can be obtuse all you want. clearly you think desanto's kimura should have been legal? micic could have just gone over right?

there's obviously a line somewhere. i think the bow and arrow should be on the other side because it meets my threshold of danger.
 

johnstownsteel

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2013
6,318
13,839
1
Johnstown Pa
Ok, I’ll take your word for it. But you obviously see why eyebrows would raise if you decide the day after a guy on your team was subject to a move, suddenly you don’t like torquing on joints.
There have been plenty of Lee arm bars, literally dozens every year, where we could have had that discussion. Some with opponents yelling in pain while an insane man insisting he just doesn’t like tough wrestling.
I actually remember JS in the past saying the move should be outlawed over on HR. Pretty sure it was during a discussion about Zain using it.
 

sstark46

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2013
51
127
1
not sure if i have here. i definitely have on some board previously. and if my dad posted here, he could tell you how i say "god, i hate that move" every time i see it. you'll just have to take my word for it lol.
I go back and forth on this a lot. I am a big believer that PD is called too quick in a lot of situations. My wife rolls her eyes every time I comment something to the effect of "it's only PD because they keep fighting it. Want it to not hurt? Then roll over to your back".

The bow and arrow, to me, seems like one of those moves that maybe should be illegal, or at least more closely monitored for PD. But then again, if it were that easy and that relaxed in rules regarding it, wouldn't everybody run it in every single match due to its effectiveness?

As an Iowa fan, my gut says I feel it should be illegal in college like it is in lower levels, but I also recognize that the bias might be coming from seeing Zain brutalize Sorenson with it in the national semifinals and now seeing Dean completely break Warner with it
 

SCub

Member
Feb 20, 2021
8
11
1
Wouldn't change a thing, it was a fabulous night of wrestling. When I think about being in a hostile environment after travelling half-way across the country, and the fact that these are still 18-23 year olds, my Penn State pride shines through. A few tidbits;

125: Kid has really grown on me. Not flashy, but patient and very calm. Hard to score on, tough on top, and can finish bouts. Would have loved to see a match-up with Ayala, but Hildebrant did what he needed, setting the tone with a bonus point win. Good lead-off wrestler.
133: Honestly was surprised by the disproportion of shots. Our whole watch-party group was. Happy for the win, for sure, but it was more due to great defense than what RBY is know for -- great offense as he leads the team in takedowns.
141: I love watching Nick wrestle. Like Brooks, he's ALWAYS moving forward looking for offense. Late Eierman takedown (to tie the score) showed how dangerous Eierman is, but Lee showed complete calm heading to SV, KNOWING he had more in the tank than his opponent. A healthy Lee will never be outworked, best motor on the team.
149: Limited offense against the better guys at this weight. He WILL wrestle them close, and always have a shot at the end, but it's a risky situation.
157: Barraclough has now lost three in a row to ranked opponents. All were extremely close, he just has to get over that hump. Limited offensive arsenal, though he is getting to legs with a chance to score, just has to close the deal. One takedown last night would have won the bout.
165: I saw a fired-up Marinelli wanting to make a statement, and he did. Berge is better than he showed, so no concern to me, even though I can't remember him being out of a bout before. Learning experience, so back to the room to get better.
174: Hat's off to both guys. They may get each other twice more this season, and I'm looking forward to them if/when they happen. This is the reason kids go to Penn State or Iowa - to wrestle in big matches.
184: Dominating win by Brooks, and despite a superior motor, he seemed to tire in the third. No biggie at all given the opponent and venue. Brooks could win by bonus in a neutral setting. Another big win in a long line of big wins.
197: Dang, Dean has owned the third this season. Late takedowns, solid rides in the third, and turning opponents late is his MO against the top guys it seems. Last night, in a tough environment, Dean came through in a BIG way. Watching him every dual, I can say I'm a big fan.
285: Great first takedown, then Kerkvliet decided to enter Cassioppi's wheelhouse and got thrown. Then it happened again later. Coaches talk about getting out of situations when they don't have an advantage. I think (my opinion only) backing out of the upper body stuff with this opponent is the better strategy. Every bout is a learning experience, and I think this one was hugely (is that a word) so. Still a toss-up next time.
Angel: Nice job overall. Anyone that wants to pick apart that performance in that environment is looking hard for something to complain about.
Good balanced summary. I am curious of your take on the PSU challenge at the end of the 1st period in the Dean/Warner match. When Warner lost his lock it sure seemed like Dean had control. Why no reversal of the call?
 

CJFisJoePaII

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2019
2,367
2,486
1
There was no whizzer, CJ. CStar had an inside hook on Kem’s inside leg from the underside. That’s what was keeping him from giving up the TD, at least until Kem broke it.
Regardless, I remain like others, dissatisfied with Rivera. Not knowing a Winn Dixie by this time….and reviewing a position where the previous offensive wrestler is now fully on his back, with neither hand attached to….ANYTHING..arm scissored and legs wrapped by the new offensive wrestler….is a complete mystery. Just because one might say, WTF is Dean doing, doesn’t mean he’s not doing it. Lol.

CStar is arguable I suppose. Deans move was not.

I meant Kem had whizzer in original post and Carter had reverse grip on Kem's leg (and Kem did have a whizzer) - I fixed it in my post after reading it, but you must have posted this while I was editing my post. In any event, the situation the OP referenced was not analogous at all as RBY does not have AD's leg, nor does AD have a whizzer in. Given Starocci's reverse hand/arm-lock on Kem's leg, a full Merkel absolutely is required to give Kem the 2T - the Merkel would negate Starocci's hold on Kem's leg if Kem were able to actually get the Merkel in which he did not. The OP is not correct that Merkel is not required in that position when the other wrestler has a lock on other wrestler's leg (which Carter did) regardless if wrestler is behind his shoulders or not.
 
Last edited:

js8793

Well-Known Member
Dec 4, 2018
1,735
3,174
1
There was no whizzer, CJ. CStar had an inside hook on Kem’s inside leg from the underside. That’s what was keeping him from giving up the TD, at least until Kem broke it.
Regardless, I remain like others, dissatisfied with Rivera. Not knowing a Winn Dixie by this time….and reviewing a position where the previous offensive wrestler is now fully on his back, with neither hand attached to….ANYTHING..arm scissored and legs wrapped by the new offensive wrestler….is a complete mystery. Just because one might say, WTF is Dean doing, doesn’t mean he’s not doing it. Lol.

CStar is arguable I suppose. Deans move was not.
i think the mistake with angel is that he initially was calling the situation right. warner was in that leg pass situation, but was still in control, and therefore there is no neutral danger count. he doesn't have to worry about the 3 seconds. however, there's a moment in that exchange where it transitions from warner controlling dean's leg on the pass to dean controlling warner's arm with the leg scissor, holding him on his back. that happens with about 1 second left and should have been 2.
 

NittanyLion84

Well-Known Member
Jan 24, 2016
1,591
2,297
1
59
PA - D9
you guys can be obtuse all you want. clearly you think desanto's kimura should have been legal? micic could have just gone over right?

there's obviously a line somewhere. i think the bow and arrow should be on the other side because it meets my threshold of danger.
You are the one being obtuse, the current line is that it is legal. Are you favor of making Lee’s arm bar illegal? If not, why not?
 

js8793

Well-Known Member
Dec 4, 2018
1,735
3,174
1
I meant Kem had whizzer in original post and Carter had reverse grip on Kem's leg (and Kem did have a whizzer) - I fixed it in my post after reading it, but you must have posted this while I was editing my post. In any event, the situation the OP referenced was not analogous at all as RBY does not have AD's leg, nor does AD have a whizzer in. Given Starocci's reverse hand/arm-lock on Kem's leg, a full Merkel absolutely is required to give Kem the 2T - the Merkel would negate Starocci's hold on Kem's leg if Kem were able to actually get the Merkel in which he did not.
i think i've cracked the case here. you don't know what a whizzer is.

also starocci loses his lock on the leg with 2 seconds left and his hands aren't within 3 feet of kem's legs at that point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sstark46

Lion8286

Well-Known Member
Sep 1, 2008
15,066
21,794
1
i think the mistake with angel is that he initially was calling the situation right. warner was in that leg pass situation, but was still in control, and therefore there is no neutral danger count. he doesn't have to worry about the 3 seconds. however, there's a moment in that exchange where it transitions from warner controlling dean's leg on the pass to dean controlling warner's arm with the leg scissor, holding him on his back. that happens with about 1 second left and should have been 2.

Are you STILL crying??
 

sstark46

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2013
51
127
1
i think the mistake with angel is that he initially was calling the situation right. warner was in that leg pass situation, but was still in control, and therefore there is no neutral danger count. he doesn't have to worry about the 3 seconds. however, there's a moment in that exchange where it transitions from warner controlling dean's leg on the pass to dean controlling warner's arm with the leg scissor, holding him on his back. that happens with about 1 second left and should have been 2.
Agreed 100%. Warner got lucky that wasn't 2 there. May have hurt him in the long run too as he would've had to show more urgency the last period rather than just trying to hold on
 
  • Like
Reactions: js8793

sstark46

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2013
51
127
1
You are the one being obtuse, the current line is that it is legal. Are you favor of making Lee’s arm bar illegal? If not, why not?
No one is saying that it is currently illegal or that Dean's win over Warner should be overturned or anything. It's a punishing move that Dean used perfectly to break Warner in what was otherwise a close match that was potentially on its way to an upset.

But I think it's a fair conversation to say that maybe it should be looked at more closely and perhaps made illegal in the future in college, as it is already in the lower levels
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski

CJFisJoePaII

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2019
2,367
2,486
1
i think i've cracked the case here. you don't know what a whizzer is.

also starocci loses his lock on the leg with 2 seconds left and his hands aren't within 3 feet of kem's legs at that point.

That's nonsense. You're full of shit if you don't think Kem has a whizzer in.... BTW, you're also full of shit that Starocci's arms are 3 feet away from Kem's leg with 2 seconds left! Starocci puts his head down on the mat such that his shoulder is directly next to the knee of Kem's leg that he has a reverse hand/arm-lock on. He still has ahold of Kem's leg at the knee to the very end you just can't see it because he has gone head-down to the mat so it was easy to hold Kem's leg at knee with reverse-lock - you can't see it because the camera angle is from back and Kem is blocking the view of Starocci's entire upper-body and head as he'd gone head-down to mat. But you're utterly full of shit that Starocci's arm (connected to CS's body at shoulder which was directly next to Kem's knee) was "three feet from Kem's leg" - that's laughable bullshit pal.
 

donboy6499

Well-Known Member
Jul 4, 2005
586
743
1
I actually remember JS in the past saying the move should be outlawed over on HR. Pretty sure it was during a discussion about Zain using it.
That’s fair, and I was sincerely saying I’ll take his word for it.
It’s hard to see it as anything but a partisan opinion though when he’s literally had the best guy in America at wrenching joints for 4 years now and I don’t recall any complaints. The issue isn’t that his opinion’s new, it’s that he has it because his guy was at the business end of it.
 

js8793

Well-Known Member
Dec 4, 2018
1,735
3,174
1
That's nonsense. You're full of shit if you don't think Kem has a whizzer in.... BTW, you're also full of shit that Starocci's arms are 3 feet away from Kem's leg with 2 seconds left! Starocci puts his head down on the mat such that his shoulder is directly next to the knee of Kem's leg that he has a reverse hand/arm-lock on. He still has ahold of Kem's leg at the knee to the very end you just can't see it because he has gone head-down to the mat so it was easy to hold Kem's leg at knee with reverse-lock - you can't see it because the camera angle is from back and Kem is blocking the view of Starocci's entire upper-body and head as he'd gone head-down to mat. But you're utterly full of shit that Starocci's arm (connected to CS's body at shoulder which was directly next to Kem's knee) was "three feet from Kem's leg" - that's laughable bullshit pal.
boy you are something lol. you can literally watch him lose his grip on video. i'll help you out and like to the exact exchange and walk you through it


with :09 left, kem lets go of the the whizzer and starts working his right hand inside, behind CS's right arm

at ;06, he locks up a side headlock, having successfully gotten behind CS's arm. he uses this to begin extending starocci.

at :02, he breaks CS's grip (btw, he never had a "reverse grip" it was a normal single. kem just forced his hand inside). At this point, it's 2. he's behind the arm and CS has absolutely nothing, no grip on anything of any kind. if you don't believe me, as the video goes from 44:26 to 44:27, from between his legs, you can see CS's left hand posted way out in front of him, nowhere near the leg.
 

js8793

Well-Known Member
Dec 4, 2018
1,735
3,174
1
That’s fair, and I was sincerely saying I’ll take his word for it.
It’s hard to see it as anything but a partisan opinion though when he’s literally had the best guy in America at wrenching joints for 4 years now and I don’t recall any complaints. The issue isn’t that his opinion’s new, it’s that he has it because his guy was at the business end of it.
i actually associated it more with cornell than penn state, specifically the dean's. zain had all sorts of other turns that he mixed in.
 

CJFisJoePaII

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2019
2,367
2,486
1
i think i've cracked the case here. you don't know what a whizzer is.

also starocci loses his lock on the leg with 2 seconds left and his hands aren't within 3 feet of kem's legs at that point.

BYW, you're full of shit that the RBY - AD clip you provided is analogous. RBY does not have hold of AD's leg - nor does AD whizzer RBY in response making him side-to-side with RBY. The two situations ARE NOT ANALOGOUS dipshit. In the situation where Starocci has ahold of Kem's leg, Kem absolutely has to have the Merkel completely in to negate Starocci's hold of his leg and be give T2 - simply having his leg through Starocci's legs is not sufficient as it was in the situation you referenced because Starocci had hold of Kem's leg (whereas RBY did not have hold of AD's leg and AD was fully behind RBY's armpit and arm on RBY's right side). Again NOT ANALOGOUS and full Merkel absolutely required by Kem in that situation where Starocci has hold of a leg to gain T2.
 

CJFisJoePaII

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2019
2,367
2,486
1
boy you are something lol. you can literally watch him lose his grip on video. i'll help you out and like to the exact exchange and walk you through it



with :09 left, kem lets go of the the whizzer and starts working his right hand inside, behind CS's right arm

at ;06, he locks up a side headlock, having successfully gotten behind CS's arm. he uses this to begin extending starocci.

at :02, he breaks CS's grip (btw, he never had a "reverse grip" it was a normal single. kem just forced his hand inside). At this point, it's 2. he's behind the arm and CS has absolutely nothing, no grip on anything of any kind. if you don't believe me, as the video goes from 44:26 to 44:27, from between his legs, you can see CS's left hand posted way out in front of him, nowhere near the leg.

Wait, you just told me there was no whizzer on the series and I didn't know what a whizzer was.... now Kemerer does have a whizzer just as I said! You're so full of shit, it's ridiculous.
 

js8793

Well-Known Member
Dec 4, 2018
1,735
3,174
1
Wait, you just told me there was no whizzer on the series and I didn't know what a whizzer was.... now Kemerer does have a whizzer just as I said! You're so full of shit, it's ridiculous.
there's not a whizzer, or anything close, at the time we're all talking about doofus
 
  • Like
Reactions: sstark46

Cowbell Man

Well-Known Member
Feb 2, 2002
4,477
4,039
1
I meant Kem had whizzer in original post and Carter had reverse grip on Kem's leg (and Kem did have a whizzer) - I fixed it in my post after reading it, but you must have posted this while I was editing my post. In any event, the situation the OP referenced was not analogous at all as RBY does not have AD's leg, nor does AD have a whizzer in. Given Starocci's reverse hand/arm-lock on Kem's leg, a full Merkel absolutely is required to give Kem the 2T - the Merkel would negate Starocci's hold on Kem's leg if Kem were able to actually get the Merkel in which he did not. The OP is not correct that Merkel is not required in that position when the other wrestler has a lock on other wrestler's leg (which Carter did) regardless if wrestler is behind his shoulders or not.
If Starocci still had the inside lock on the leg then I agree with you, no TD. I thought he lost the leg based on the change in Kem’s leg position and Starocci arm, in which case it becomes a TD. The latter was the basis for my opinion
 
  • Like
Reactions: sstark46

js8793

Well-Known Member
Dec 4, 2018
1,735
3,174
1
BYW, you're full of shit that the RBY - AD clip you provided is analogous. RBY does not have hold of AD's leg - nor does AD whizzer RBY in response making him side-to-side with RBY. The two situations ARE NOT ANALOGOUS dipshit. In the situation where Starocci has ahold of Kem's leg, Kem absolutely has to have the Merkel completely in to negate Starocci's hold of his leg and be give T2 - simply having his leg through Starocci's legs is not sufficient as it was in the situation you referenced because Starocci had hold of Kem's leg (whereas RBY did not have hold of AD's leg and AD was fully behind RBY's armpit and arm on RBY's right side). Again NOT ANALOGOUS and full Merkel absolutely required by Kem in that situation where Starocci has hold of a leg to gain T2.
no he didn't lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: sstark46

js8793

Well-Known Member
Dec 4, 2018
1,735
3,174
1
If Starocci still had the inside lock on the leg then I agree with you, no TD. I thought he lost the leg based on the change in Kem’s leg position, and camera angle isn’t good enough then.
he lost the leg at :02. you can see it on the video extremely clearly. if it helps, switch your playback speed to .5x
 
  • Like
Reactions: sstark46

CJFisJoePaII

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2019
2,367
2,486
1
he lost the leg at :02. you can see it on the video extremely clearly. if it helps, switch your playback speed to .5x

You're so full of shit - the video shows no such thing! Starocci's right arm is completely locked around Kem's lower leg as he goes head down to mat (Starocci intentionally goes head down to mat so his right-shoulder is right next to Kem's knee/lower-leg and make it easier to keep Kem's lower leg securely hooked with his right-arm - which he clearly does in the video contrary to your absurd claims.)

Let's see how many times you've been full of shit in this string:

Claim that RBY-AD position is analogous when it wasn't as RBY NEVER had AD's leg, nor did AD EVER put in a whizzer. AD didn't need full Merkel as RBY never had his leg - Kem absolutely did to negate Starocci's leg hold for a 2T to be awarded

Claim that there was never a whizzer in the Kem-Starocci series - full of shit, there absolutely was a very clear whizzer by Kem in response to Starocci's leg hold which is what put wrestlers side-by-side.

Claim that video shows Starocci losing control of Kem's lower left leg which he has hooked with his right arm... - again, full of shit, the video shows no such thing and shows quite the opposite in fact! You reference Starocci's left arm when video clearly shows that Starocci has lower leg hooked elbow-deep with his RIGHT ARM as he goes head down to mat to make it easier to hold with about 5 seconds left. You cannot see Starocci's right arm, shoulder or head in the final seconds of the video as he's gone into a head down position to make it easy to keep Kem's lower leg hooked with right arm but you can't see them because Kem is in front of them. But there is zero evidence in video that the position changes at all during the last 5 seconds (and you can see Starocci has lower leg very clearly hooked elbow-deep with his right arm as he goes down into head-on-mat position with about 5 seconds left.
 
Last edited:

sstark46

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2013
51
127
1
Any luck with the NCAA in changing the results, @js8793??
lol jesus are you insecure. absolutely no one is calling for an overturn of the match results (let alone the meet results). this is definitely a very close and interesting scenario that played out in a highly contested match that both sides think think they have a point on.

If you can't contribute something meaningful, then why insert yourself into the conversation at all?
 

jmadden1998

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
1,427
2,392
1
You're so full of shit - the video shows no such thing! Starocci's right arm is completely locked around Kem's lower leg as he goes head down to mat (Starocci intentionally goes head down to mat so his right-shoulder is right next to Kem's knee/lower-leg and make it easier to keep Kem's lower leg securely hooked with his right-arm - which he clearly does in the video contrary to your absurd claims.)

Let's see how many times you've been full of shit in this string:

Claim that RBY-AD position is analogous when it wasn't as RBY NEVER had AD's leg, nor did AD EVER put in a whizzer. AD didn't need full Merkel as RBY never had his leg - Kem absolutely did to negate Starocci's leg hold for a 2T to be awarded

Claim that there was never a whizzer in the Kem-Starocci series - full of shit, there absolutely was a very clear whizzer by Kem in response to Starocci's leg hold which is what put wrestlers side-by-side.

Claim that video shows Starocci losing control of Kem's lower left leg which he has hooked with his right arm... - again, full of shit, the video shows no such thing and shows quite the opposite in fact! You reference Starocci's left arm when video clearly shows that Starocci has lower leg hooked elbow-deep with his RIGHT ARM!
 

js8793

Well-Known Member
Dec 4, 2018
1,735
3,174
1
You're so full of shit - the video shows no such thing! Starocci's right arm is completely locked around Kem's lower leg as he goes head down to mat (Starocci intentionally goes head down to mat so his right-shoulder is right next to Kem's knee/lower-leg and make it easier to keep Kem's lower leg securely hooked with his right-arm - which he clearly does in the video contrary to your absurd claims.)

Let's see how many times you've been full of shit in this string:

Claim that RBY-AD position is analogous when it wasn't as RBY NEVER had AD's leg, nor did AD EVER put in a whizzer. AD didn't need full Merkel as RBY never had his leg - Kem absolutely did to negate Starocci's leg hold for a 2T to be awarded

Claim that there was never a whizzer in the Kem-Starocci series - full of shit, there absolutely was a very clear whizzer by Kem in response to Starocci's leg hold which is what put wrestlers side-by-side.

Claim that video shows Starocci losing control of Kem's lower left leg which he has hooked with his right arm... - again, full of shit, the video shows no such thing and shows quite the opposite in fact! You reference Starocci's left arm when video clearly shows that Starocci has lower leg hooked elbow-deep with his RIGHT ARM!
you're a lunatic lol. go to :03 left and tell me where Starocci's left hand is and where his right hand is and then tell me where they are at :02 seconds
 
  • Like
Reactions: sstark46

jrod65

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2019
549
1,738
1
the real loser here is obviously me because i've let one of the world's stupidest people draw me into this smh

50a222b2-29b3-471a-a1f6-de09eed4443f_text.gif
 

Lion8286

Well-Known Member
Sep 1, 2008
15,066
21,794
1
lol jesus are you insecure. absolutely no one is calling for an overturn of the match results (let alone the meet results). this is definitely a very close and interesting scenario that played out in a highly contested match that both sides think think they have a point on.

If you can't contribute something meaningful, then why insert yourself into the conversation at all?

lol. What meaningful contribution have you made @sstark46 ?? I anxiously await your reply.
 

CJFisJoePaII

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2019
2,367
2,486
1
you're a lunatic lol. go to :03 left and tell me where Starocci's left hand is and where his right hand is and then tell me where they are at :02 seconds

You keep saying left arm... hey bozo, the video CLEARLY shows Starocci RIGHT ARM hooked completely around Kem's lower left leg elbow-deep with 5 seconds left (i.e., the elbow-deep hook is towards Starocci's body). The video then shows Starocci going to a head-to-mat position to relieve pressure on his RIGHT ARM that is clearly hooked elbow-deep completely around Kem's lower leg with hand back towards his own body. Once Starocci goes head-to-mat, you can't see his right arm, right shoulder or head but there is ZERO evidence on the video that anything changes relative to Starocci's right-arm hook during the last 5 seconds. You're full of shit that there is, just like you're full of shit that the RBY-AD series you referenced was an analogous series - IT WASN'T! Just like you were full of shit that there was no whizzer involved in the Kem-Starocci series.... and that I "don't know what a whizzer is!

You keep making baseless claims doesn't make them reality dipwad.
 

Lion8286

Well-Known Member
Sep 1, 2008
15,066
21,794
1
I haven't made one, but I'm also not trying to derail the conversation at hand or change the subject just because I have nothing better to offer lmao

So you've made no meaningful contributions. Thanks for confirming. lmao