Beketov

If only I didn't work tomorrow morning. Playing a game at 1am just isn't in the cards for me Made sure not to reset my quests though. Gonna jump into act 5 tomorrow night and then make a crusader after.

Claim 4

http://z11.invisionfree.com/vhl/index.php?showuser=5068

That was like, 2 boards back haha. It was our original invisionfree board that had the posting limit issue. We were then on an SMF that got DDOSED and now we're here. I actually almost forgot that's why we switched to SMF in the first place.

Claim 4 Fuck these 50 hour work weeks

Wow, Remy. No team should ever lose with only 13 shots against.

I had to do it with Young in Seattle. Not saying it's the same situation, that Olynick deserves it, or that it's even relevant (that was like S11 or something). Just wanted to point out that it can happen and it really sucks for the goalie when it does.

While I agree with that I find it kinda stupid that goalies should have a different rule. For one, if goalies are brought up 9/10 times they'll only get 8 games and will be miserable the rest of the time. I know because I've been there. Forwards that are brought up, on the other hand, will at least be able to play decent minutes. For two, how is it any different for a goalie with 10 TPE to go up against forwards with over 180? It works both ways. If you're going to use this intimidation as reasoning it should be recognized that it works both ways. I do feel like a distinct rule needs to be made and enforced but I also firmly believe that it shouldn't be different for goalies and players. There's already less incentive for goalies (seeing as there can really only be 10 VHL goalies at a time) so why should we make it worse by saying they lose out on things that forwards receive?

That would explain allowing a lot of shots against but not me letting so many in. 5 GA on only 28 shots is pretty poor IMO and I'm not blaming the D on that one.

Once again I prove that TPE numbers mean nothing to goalies by sucking ass at every opportunity.

Player Name: Evgeni Chekhov Cash you have: $5 250 000 Workout Name: 10 TPE Cost of Workout: 4mill Cash Left: $1 250 000

Claim 4

For free? There's nowhere, at least not legally. Microsoft keeps a pretty short leash on it. There might be a trial but not sure. If it's nothing too intense you could use open office. It's free and can import / export to office formats.

Personally I don't have either a PS4 for an CB1 but I've had experience with both. As much as The One tempts me because of how amazing Titanfall looks, I personally wouldn't buy one. Especially if you have a PS4 already I think you'll notice a distinct lack of power with the XB1 (as you said it is weaker) and some gimmicks. The kinect is just that if you ask me. It works on occasion and voice commands are cool when they work but it's often a struggle to get them doing exactly what you want. Aside from the kinect and a few exclusives I don't see anything that the XB1 offers over a PS4. Titanfall looks amazing but I feel like if you get tired of the game you're XBOne would collect dust compared to the PS4. That's just my opinion though. As I said I don't own either one but it's what I've seen. Honestly, neither person I know used their next gen console much yet because of lack of games. I personally don't plan on buying either until more content is there.

In UFC he has to actually defend himself. He knows in the WWE that no one is going to be out to put him on the shelf so his work ethic is apparently quite terrible. The other difference is that it's training for the UFC, it's rehearsing for a match with taker. He's never been known much for practicing matches so we'll see how this goes. I have a hunch it's gonna be a heated match but quality wise it won't come near Taker's Best mania ones.

A few buddies of mine were going to split the cost, mostly the watch Wrestlemania, but since they won't release the fucking thing I can't get it Especially annoying since my Apple TV popped the WWE Network on and I can't use it

If that's the case It's going to be the worst streak match in a long time and taker's likely going to suffer some pretty major injuries which I'd rather not see.

Strangle enough I don't think they'll do Lesnar Vs The Streak. The angle is there but Lesnar isn't a good opponent for taker for a number of reasons. 1) Undertaker gets his opponents for WM on a strict rehearsal schedule, usually down at his personal gym. It's part of why Taker's WM matches are so good. Lesnar doesn't have the work ethic required to go through it. 2) Scripted of not Lesnar has a really rough style. It's well documented that people hate fighting him because of it. With how rough of shape Taker's in they wouldn't risk his health further by putting him up against Lesnar. Especially considering the two guys legitimately don't like each other. While I hope for a Sting encounter with the Undertaker at Wrestlemania I know it won't happen . I also loved his matches at mania with Triple H but they won't go there again. I'd also really enjoy a Mick Foley return to fight Taker since they've had amazing matches before. Again though, that's unfortunately not in the cards. I'm predicting they put Cena up against Taker at Mania. They can work a storyline between Batista and Orton better than Batista and Cena IMO so no reason to give Cena the title tonight. With that in mind, however, he'll always be billed near the top of the WM card so a match against the Undertaker makes sense. Plus, as much as I hate Cena, he does work hard and isn't a terrible guy to step into the ring with apparently. That fixes the above mentioned reasons as to why Lesnar wouldn't work.

I guess the WWE has decided that bringing back more retired guys for wrestlemania is still the plan. The Rock for two straight years and Hogan this year. As long as they keep him away from fighting it might work but I'm still not fond of having him back after so long in TNA but oh well. I am excited about the rumors of Sting being negotiated. It's all happened before but he doesn't have a contract with anyone right now. We might be able to finally get the Undertaker vs. Sting match that has forever been a wish.

Great first period by both teams. I'd say the American speed really had them on the advantage early but the second half Canada slowed the pace down and got a few chances. Good period overall.

MacBook Pro* unless your fellow classmates all have workstation computers Anyway, for what you described as your wants that seems like a great machine. I love my Mac and know many others who do but ultimately it comes down to whether or not you think you need one. I agree that for your needs paying for a Mac might not be worth it.

I don't really want to hijack Higgins' thread anymore. Feel free to shoot me a PM and we can discuss it.

I used to be a final cut guy but a combination of FCP X and working for a company that doesn't use it has pushed me toward Avid Media Conposer. It does natively run on both but I find the overall experience to be smoother on a Mac. The program runs smoother, runs faster, and crashes less. Plus OS X, IMO just handles things better than windows. I don't feel like I have to constantly babysit my machines. Again though, this is me. Not everyone is the same. I, as well as many, will never go back to PC. There are plenty of people though that are adamantly against everything Mac and that's fine too.

That's great for you, and may very we'll be great for Higgins. I'm simply offering a perspective from the other side. I'm not attempting to kindle up a Mac vs. PC debate I'm simply stating my case, same as anyone on the PC side. For what Higgins described, I wouldn't suggest a Mac either. I said that in my first post. I'm simply offering an opinion on them because he did bring up an interest and because I would personally never switch back to a PC. That's just me though. For what I do a Mac works better and the OS X ecosystem makes my personal workflow more efficient.

100% Agree Yes, Canada shouldn’t be squeaking out a win against a team like Latvia but wording it solely like that gives no credit to the Latvian’s. Canada actually had a pretty strong game. 57 (I think, correct me if I’m wrong) shots on net, dominated the faceoffs, went strong on the forecheck, etc. We just happened to run into a goalie on fire and a coach who knew how to get the most out of a surprisingly strong team. There are certainly more tests to come but I don’t think Canada should feel bad at all with only winning 2-1 against that team. They played amazing.