BuzzerBeater Forums

Ok so it was a few years ago and things may have changed but I had a look in my photo album. My caption of the photo reads:

Dinner at the Lalah (Former Intercontenental Hotel) $7 each. Down with the "World Arrogance Power".

The picture shows me sitting under a sign that says "Down * with * USA".

I have another picture of a big building painted with a design that shows a US flag that turns into bombs with the caption "Down With the U.S.A" I don't know exactly where it was but it was near the former "US Den of Espionage " (The US Embassy) and our hotel the Iranshahr Hotel which was only $15 US a night - always struck me as funny that everyone used the money of "The Great Satan" but it was because at the time I think the biggest note was 5,000 Rials which was worth $2:50 and were also fairly rare, the 1,000 Rials note being the most common which was funn when we changed $300 and ended up with 600 notes.

I forgot to say that I also visited Bam, Yazd, Kermanshah, Mashhad, Ahvas, Gorgon and Bandar E Abbas.

Yes and it was amazing. I have seen Crusader castles in Syria, medieval ones in England, amazing Renaissance ones in Italy but as an entire city totally deserted and incredibly preserved it was incomprable. Not sure what it is like now - probably like a lot of the "restored" sites you see in the Middle East that are much better than they ever were before like Omani Forts.

Iran was so cheap, and I am not a rich man, that we could like like the elite. We would wake up in the morning in Tehran, taxi to the airport, fly to our destination for the day (Bandar e Abbas, Mashhad, etc) hire a taxi for the day, get the driver to take us to see all the sites we wanted to see for the day, then take us to whatever was the best restaurant in the city, have a luxurious diner, then back to the airport, fly back to Tehran and taxi back to the hotel, hopefully in time to catch some NBA on TV. All that and it was typically costing us $100 a day. Crazy.

Ok the no alcohol, bars, shorts, English or women was a bit of a downer but we still had a ball.

Last edited by yodabig at 9/28/2011 3:29:10 AM

All that and it was typically costing us $100 a day.

US or Australian $?

Well now they are about the same we got $1.05 for an Aussie dollar a weel ago but it has dipped to about $.98 now. It was US$ at the time, as I said ironic that everyone used the currency of "The Great Satan" but that was how it was. At that time I think we were getting about $.75 for an Aussie dollar.

On topic, I would love them to add some more offences that didn't work with just any team but that you could create a team to work with.

One example is 5-Out. My school had to run it this year as we really had five guards and no big men. It would need a team where everyone had both JS and JR including the PF and C. It would be best defended by 1-3-1 or 3-2, man to man would be the best if the defending team's big men had OD, but if not they would get burnt a lot.

Then there is flex. It is designed to hurt man to man defences so would be a good game feature. It would require good passing, handling and jump shot and result in a lot of mismatches against a man to man with guards being defended by Cs etc. It isn't so good against a 3-2 or 2-3 zone. Hooray forthe 2-3 zone actually hurting an offence.

Finally triangle. This requires great passing by every player and experience but I don't know if that can be coded. The idea is to eventually get the ball to your best player in a position where no help is possible and they can get a reasonably easy mid-range or low-post shot. The bigs must be able to pass and everyone needs to be able to handle and hit the mid range jump shot and inside shot.

Last edited by yodabig at 9/29/2011 6:30:32 PM

id like them to fix the broken tactics they have got before releasing more broken tactics :)

and 2-3 does do something , it packs your bags early for you in most cases.

You are right! 2-3 zone does have a use! If your starters have played too many minutes in the first game then you can run a 2-3 zone and in the second half after the game has turned into a blowout instead of a close match if you had played man to man they can sit on the bench and rest.

had not thought of that wow 2-3 just doubled in effectiveness for me :P

You are right! 2-3 zone does have a use! If your starters have played too many minutes in the first game then you can run a 2-3 zone and in the second half after the game has turned into a blowout instead of a close match if you had played man to man they can sit on the bench and rest.

isn't a win with a blowout better then a close match? While is it then impossible to beat a slightly better opponent, through the advantegeous tactical choiche?