Beketov

You guys know the deal by now. Hit me up with questions for CoDCast #54. @eaglesfan036 @The Bread Man @der meister @Phil @tfong @Molholt @Banackock @gorlab @JardyB10 @evrydayimbyfuglien @Jericho @DollarAndADream @Kendrick @mpclardy @hedgehog337 @Devise @Smarch @Will @Streetlite @punkhippie

Make your playoffs Predictions; both the series winners and the playoff MVP. Reflect on Ravenwing’s career, has it been everything you hoped when you started? Ignoring the blue team (too obvious) name three members the VHL wouldn’t feel the same without.

I just did a quick count of my shutouts and found that is the case. Regular season only and they were up to date so I'm sitting at 71 and the record is currently 93 so I'll need 23 shutouts next season to beat the record. Possible but will be damn challenging to say the least, especially in my 8th season. If only I had managed to get at least a few in my rookie season instead of 0, that would have been helpful.

As Season 54 comes to a close Jakab Holik finds himself in a position he never expected 7 seasons ago when he started his VHL career; near the top of a record book. After a stellar 20 shutout season the Czech net minder sits third all-time in shutouts with 71 (Tied with Ariel Weinstein). With 1 season left in his VHL career surpassing Sandro Clegane for 2nd all time (74) should be easily manageable but Holik wants more. He has his eyes on the golden number of 23 shutouts, the amount required to surpass Hall of Famer Greg Clegane for first all-time. The challenge is a hefty one for certain. The 20 shutouts Holik managed this season is a career high for him and he would need to surpass even that to cement his name in the record books as shutout king. It's anyone's guess if he'll be able to do it. For now, Holik is simply happy to see his name amonst the likes of the Cleganes and Weinstein. "When I came into this league, those 3 guys were always just one step ahead of me. Now it's my time to shine and I'm not holding back. Even to finish 2nd on the list would be amazing but I really want to snag that top spot." To put into perspective quite how many shutouts Holik has managed, the last goalie out of the Beketov agency, Evgeni Chekhov, finished his career with only 30. His career was several seasons shorter but it's still quite a leap to go from 30 to nearly 100. *For Holik P.S Do all time stats count playoffs or just regular season? I'm not actually even sure. If they count the playoffs I may nail a couple more in the first round this year and make things a little easier next season. We shall see. This is also assuming the stats were updated last season. I believe they were though it still says "Updated S52"

If that's the case you should be able to easily provide an example how. Please, be my guest.

Not being from a country doesn't mean you can't understand things about a country. For example, I'm Canadian but can still understand from observation that the American education system is severely flawed. Hell your secretary of education is a rich blow-hard that has never touched the public education system with a 10 foot pole.

I never said anything about a re-sim. I said in the record books your 20 shutouts should have an asterisk because you shouldn't have been in that game. I'm fine with you having it, I just don't think it should be registered as such in the records. If my team forgot to bench me for 4 games and I got shutouts in them all should I have those shutouts counted? It may be less but he still played more than he should have. Fine list it as 20 in the records but just slap an asterisk on it. It's not nearly a big a deal as it seems.

Obviously I'm bias as hell on it but personally I see no problem with an asterisk on Moon's 20 shutouts in the record book. He arguably should have never played the last game he got one in so he likely should only have 19. It affects nothing, just saying that a simple asterisk on it seems fair.

8GP =/= 8 Starts

7 seasons done (yes 7, not 8) and people still can't spell my name

+4 Sokolov

User Name: Beketov EASTERN CONFERENCE (A2) Ottawa vs (M2) Pittsburgh Winner: Pittsburgh # of Games: 6 WESTERN CONFERENCE (P1) Anaheim vs (W2) Nashville Winner: Nashville # of Games: 7

Not gonna lie, this episode of the CoDCast is a bit all over the place. We start playing IW and going for sniper / pistol camos, then quickly switch to trying a challenge involving shooting down streaks, then get fucked by a lack of lobbies and switch to MWR. It's... something. Anyway, while not yelling at all those annoyances I answer questions from @Phil and @punkhippie to the best of my abilities. *For Holik

S54: The year of inconsistency

Were they ever on this board? I thought they left during the SMF board.

Getting credits is always fun. The glow wears off a little bit it's always still cool when it pops up. Sadly I haven't managed the big screen yet since the only feature I worked on didn't credit me (long story) but even the TV screen is pretty fun, plus it means 8-12 a year depending on the show haha. Still, I gotta say, this project seems significantly more interesting than what we usually get on the east coast. Or at least less French. Edit: As an aside, we have at least 3-4 Filmmaker's as members or former members of this site. It's honestly a travesty that we have never actually made "VHL: The Movie" (working title) a reality.

I'll always take good wins against Quebec. GG.

Might keep recording these at 1080p30 to keep the issues at bay but we'll see. Either way I'll be needing some questions! @eaglesfan036 @The Bread Man @der meister @Phil @tfong @Molholt @Banackock @gorlab @JardyB10 @evrydayimbyfuglien @Jericho @DollarAndADream @Kendrick @mpclardy @hedgehog337 @Devise @Smarch @Will @Streetlite @punkhippie

+4 Sokolov

Would have been nice to get the SO to keep that S% but Toronto loves to ruin that so I'll take the W at least.

What. The. Fuck

Oh boy I wish I hadn't just accidentally refreshed my page because I feel as if I can't express the anger I just had written, don't worry though, I'll try. What facts are we blind to? Please, enlighten me. The facts as I see it are the facts we have presented. Meanwhile, you have simply spouted back the rhetoric of a sociopathic liar. So please, explain to me how universal health care is flawed. Your boy Donny praised the Aussie version of it just this week (LINK) and has claimed several times that he's in favour of universal health care and a liberal when it comes to health care (LINK TO JUST A FEW OF THEM) Also, you use the word liberal as if it's a dirty word. I will gladly be called a liberal, any day of the week, bring it on. If being a liberal means I give a rats ass about my fellow man then I kindly accept it. Since you clearly don't know anything about how our health care runs let me explain it to you. I pay a few dollars extra in tax every pay so that myself, and every Canadian, has access to medical services when they need it. So does everyone else, that's how the cost stays low, because it's spread over millions. Will I ever need that health care? Maybe, maybe not, but it's there and I'm happy to keep paying for it. Even if Iived to be 100 and never once visited a hospital I would still be more than happy to have paid it. Not because I needed it but because perhaps my family did, perhaps my friends did, or my neighbours, or just anyone. That's not being foolish or a "liberal" (if you want to use that as some horrible slur) it's called having human compassion. I don't want to have other people suffer because I wanted to keep a few extra dollars in my pocket. The ideology that you would rather your fellow Americans suffer because you don't want to pay a little every pay cheque for them is mind-blowing. In total my health care costs account for less than 6% of my income; take a look at American costs and see if you can say that. So go ahead, call me a liberal, call me whatever you damn well please. But every other developed country in the world has realized that the health of it's citizens should come before the profits of it's richest. America apparently has not received the memo. I look forward to seeing how you defend that.

What are those long term projections based on though? Nothing I have found shows any reason to believe that prices will come down. Insurance companies will want more overhead because fewer people will be paying them which means they will charge vastly more. The tax credits you mention seem like a great way to mask this as a positive thing. Sure, you're receiving some money back but it's far less than you will be paying in extra. If I owe my insurance company $8000 more than I did before it really doesn't help me much that the government cuts me a cheque for $4000 does it? The bill also removes the ACA's limitation on pre-existing conditions which means that insurers can charge more if people have them: and before you say it the list is pretty extensive regarding what they deem pre-existing conditions to be. Yes, in Canada we have a similar list and it does make it hard for people with them to get extra coverage. However because our healthcare is guaranteed we can get basic coverage that we need without being left with a bill. Meanwhile in the US you can be completely ignored by a coverage provider. That's bad enough for serious stuff but it also allows insurance providers the freedom to deny people insurance over trivial things such as Acne, being overweight, or having kidney stones. You know, things that 90% of people experience at one time or another. Honestly a single payer / universal system is the only logical route for a developed nation. The United States spends more on health care than most countries while simultaneously offering less coverage. That makes absolutely no sense at all. You have a right to own as many firearms as you want but not the right to survive being shot by one. If that's not backwards I don't know what is.

Yup I would rather pay a little extra in tax every pay cheque then be worried that if something ever happens to me I'll be in debt forever. Like I said, if not for Canada's health care system I would be either buried in debt or dead. Instead I'm alive and well with an amazing credit score.

This puts the control back on the insurance companies though, and allows them to charge whatever insane rates they want, especially in regard to pre-existing conditions. The ACA limited the insurance companies so everyone got it but the costs were lower. While what you explain is how it should THEORETICALLY work it isn't how it will work in practice. Without the government oversight insurance companies will massively overcharge (as they always have) because the only option people have is them or nothing. The ACA offered an affordable option. So sure, you won't get more coverage than you want but because the costs will go up (when have insurance companies ever not been greedy) you'll just end up with less coverage at a higher rate.