WilcoFan

I just called the Cubs, who directed me to this page: http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/tickets/ps_refund_2008.jsp#cubs Chicago Cubs If the game numbered hereon is not played, this ticket may be eligible for a refund or credit of the dollar value indicated on the front of this ticket. Please see front of ticket to determine what ticket type you have for applicable policy: SEASON TICKETS: Season ticket holder of record will automatically receive a credit to their 2009 season ticket account. This ticket has no cash value. MLB and BROADCAST TICKETS: Tickets issued by MLB and through their Broadcast Partners Offices marked "MLB" on the front of the ticket will receive an automatic credit for any unplayed postseason games. MLB/Broadcast Partner's tickets SHOULD NOT be returned and will have no cash value. CLUB TICKETS: Tickets issued through any of the Participating or Non-Participating Major League Clubs marked "CLUBS" on the front of their ticket will receive an automatic credit from the Club that issued the tickets. Club tickets SHOULD NOT be returned and will have no cash value. INDIVIDUAL TICKETS: Individual ticket holders must send the entire ticket along with their name, address, and daytime phone number to: Chicago Cubs Ticket Office 1060 West Addison Chicago, IL 60613 The Chicago Cubs will not be responsible for mailed tickets not received, unless proof of receipt by the Chicago Cubs is provided. Failure to claim said refund by November 30, 2008, will constitute waiver of all right to any refund and/or credit will be deemed an irrevocable assignment of said rights including the right to a refund of any amount paid for this ticket to the Chicago Cubs. We recommend register mail or other tracking services.

At least Wuertz will know why he's not on the playoff roster.

Better than Marquis and Cotts. Ouch. The guy threw one pitch. ...and got pulled immediately. 'Nuff said. Huh? He faced the Brewers hottest hitter, threw a single pitch, and got a shallow pop up that should have resulted in an out. I don't think the fact that he got pulled has anything to do with his performance today. Oh, sorry, I mistook Fielder's pop for another hit. My bad. Don't worry about it-the guy still sucks.

Better than Marquis and Cotts. Ouch. The guy threw one pitch. ...and got pulled immediately. 'Nuff said. Huh? He faced the Brewers hottest hitter, threw a single pitch, and got a shallow pop up that should have resulted in an out. I don't think the fact that he got pulled has anything to do with his performance today.

Better than Marquis and Cotts. Ouch. The guy threw one pitch.

The Great Felix Pie has no idea what he's doing.

"If we were playing non-contending teams, nobody would be saying a word," Piniella told reporters in New York before Thursday's loss to the Mets. "What's the sense of trying to take care of everybody else? Take care of yourself ..."

I'm glad it came down to Pujols with the winning runs on base. Enough of this chicken little garbage. Take on the best they have and beat them. No excuses. Well done, Cubs.

Harden hits 94 on the gun and looks sharp, Cubs win, Brewers lose....just about the best day in two weeks.

Another china doll on the pitching staff. He can be a good pitcher, but so could Wood and Prior. Wow, just wow. I don't see where this statement is factually incorrect. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means... A) I don't use the word "factually" all that often, and B) tell me how that's incorrect? Harden is a good pitcher when he's healthy, but he's had a difficult time staying healthy in his career, just like Prior and Wood. Am I wrong? a.) Its actually a quote from a movie, sir. b.) It is incorrect to use the word "factually" to describe an OPINION.

Another china doll on the pitching staff. He can be a good pitcher, but so could Wood and Prior. Wow, just wow. I don't see where this statement is factually incorrect. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means...

Really? Complaining about a 40 pitch, four run inning in which the patience and solid approach at the plate that has been missing for the last week finally came back? Wow...just wow.

Scoring 4 runs+Lilly being awesome=most fun inning in a week.

I like how people complain about everything.

Taking pitches, driving up pitch counts, hitting line drives... Good offense.

Something both Cards and Cubs fans can agree on! :) Cards choke jobs since 69: 85, 87, 96, 00, 04, 05 Yeah, but 1969!! In 1969, the Cubs were out of first place by September 10.

Nice Dusty Baker hindsight argument. Well played. There was also the foresight, the statistics, and the fact that it's bloody stupid to bunt with Dero when you've got what'shisface batting next That's okay. You tried to criticize and you were wrong. Buck up and keep shooting for that rainbow. A) you confirmed that you don't know what statistically significant means, B) you missed the point: you sound exactly like that stubborn little kid who won't acknowledge not just why he's wrong, but that he's wrong. A.) Ummm, sorry. Feel free to keep pushing that, though. B.) Irony. Please define "statistically significant" without googling or wiki-ing, plz. You mean "not due to chance?" Feel free to explain how the win PROBABILITY difference of 1% (when based upon previous data) is statistically significant. And now you've completely confirmed that you don't know what it means. ](*,) Ummm...once again, good try. You may want to look it up yourself.

Nice Dusty Baker hindsight argument. Well played. There was also the foresight, the statistics, and the fact that it's bloody stupid to bunt with Dero when you've got what'shisface batting next That's okay. You tried to criticize and you were wrong. Buck up and keep shooting for that rainbow. A) you confirmed that you don't know what statistically significant means, B) you missed the point: you sound exactly like that stubborn little kid who won't acknowledge not just why he's wrong, but that he's wrong. A.) Ummm, sorry. Feel free to keep pushing that, though. B.) Irony. Please define "statistically significant" without googling or wiki-ing, plz. You mean "not due to chance?" Feel free to explain how the win PROBABILITY difference of 1% (when based upon previous data) is statistically significant.

Nice Dusty Baker hindsight argument. Well played. There was also the foresight, the statistics, and the fact that it's bloody stupid to bunt with Dero when you've got what'shisface batting next That's okay. You tried to criticize and you were wrong. Buck up and keep shooting for that rainbow. This last post and "that's nice" do not qualify as effective arguments. When it is clear that the difference between two numbers is roughly 1% and some trumpet those as unequivocal proof of the truth of something that hasn't happened, then this is all the response that is deserved.

Nice Dusty Baker hindsight argument. Well played. There was also the foresight, the statistics, and the fact that it's bloody stupid to bunt with Dero when you've got what'shisface batting next That's okay. You tried to criticize and you were wrong. Buck up and keep shooting for that rainbow. A) you confirmed that you don't know what statistically significant means, B) you missed the point: you sound exactly like that stubborn little kid who won't acknowledge not just why he's wrong, but that he's wrong. A.) Ummm, sorry. Feel free to keep pushing that, though. B.) Irony.

Nice Dusty Baker hindsight argument. Well played. it's better than any argument you pooped out on that last page. Equating your argument with something I would poop out. That's about right.

Nice Dusty Baker hindsight argument. Well played. There was also the foresight, the statistics, and the fact that it's bloody stupid to bunt with Dero when you've got what'shisface batting next That's okay. You tried to criticize and you were wrong. Buck up and keep shooting for that rainbow.

Nice Dusty Baker hindsight argument. Well played.

Those are very nice numbers. You want a guy in scoring position. You can say what you want, but statistics show that bunting decreases your chances of winning That's very nice. Good for statistics. Bill Plashke, is that you? Nothing like utterly distorting my point. In THIS SITUATION, you bunt. uh no, based on this exact situation, it still lowers your win probability. Actually, no it doesn't, as 1% is not a significant statistical difference. Its a judgment call. and a stupid one to take the bat out of a good hitter so an inferior hitter can bat with a runner on 2nd. That's very nice. I disagree. A) you clearly don't know what "statistically significant" means B) when you wrote down something like "2+3=6" and your math teacher pointed out you were wrong, did you say "That's very nice. I disagree." A.) Actually, I do. Random variance must be over your head. B.) Do you have any idea how dumb that reads? You're comparing basic mathematical addition to an interpretation of a situation that has at least 3-4 subjective analyses within it. Nice try, though.

Yeah, I hear ya...even with a loss, the Cubs are still 31 games over 500, firmly in first place with the best record in the NL...Definite panic time. How, exactly, does the situation you describe differ from 1969? There's a wild card now... which makes a huge difference Ooooo okay so we have a safety valve that will let us get swept by the Mets instead of the Dbacks. I see. lol whatever you say man.. feel free to keep flying off the handle. how have you ever survived a 162 game season? At least I'm won't be devastated when it actually happens. Prepare for the worst. You'll just be a negative wreck every single step of the way until then. That's what I want out of my entertainment...pure and utter depression and angst the whole time.