Betting isn't the same as stating as fact. In betting, you can lose if you are wrong. In stating as fact, you can't lose, because it's already true. And I've made the point before, because you've brought up the whole "me stating as fact" thing before (for some odd reason, you felt it important to bring up
again), and that I usually always cover myself with words like imho, feel, think, etc, etc. I don't have any insider sources like some people might, so all my thoughts are exactly that, just thoughts, and I hope I make it quite clear of that.
Why am I negative? Give me two examples of me being negative with the new set. 1 lv.X per box. One. Now, give me a second. You won't find it. It might sound negative, but in reality and imho, it's somewhat rational and realistic. I can't remember sets off the top of my head, but I remember people have better luck with lv.Xs in sets that had less than 4 in them. I seem to remember people pulling 2 lv.Xs more often in earlier sets than they do now (almost never it seems). Why should this change? More lv.Xs in the set? Has it changed between MT and MD? Nope. I don't see why it would change now. We aren't even guaranteed 8 lv.Xs. We are guaranteed more than 4 thanks to the "more lv.Xs than ever before." 5 is more than 4.
I don't see how you can apply EX-set logic to lv.X set logic. They are two totally different kinds of cards. We had so many sets where we had over 4 EXs in the set (all of them, I think, had more than 4), and we have never had a set with over 4 lv.X in them (yet). So there is no pattern for you to jump upon to (hopefully) "prove" me wrong.
I don't know what your problem with me is. You seem to be
trying to find reasons to call me out, because you don't seem to be quoting anyone else here that shares the same views with me. I would think you might have better stuff to do with your life than come up with excuses to put down a fellow player of the game.
=/ [DEL]'Mom[/DEL] Prime
Prime, I have a serious question? Why are you so negative about new set releases all the time? You ALWAYS think of the absolute worst possibility and then say it like it is a fact.
Here is why your actually wrong, If you look at sets that have had 8 Ex's then you would know what is going to happen here. Most of the time if a set has 1-4 Ex's/Lv. X it is 1 per box. If it has 5-7 Ex's/Lv. X it is 2 per box. 8 is interesting because it was about 2-3 per box. 9 is 3 per box.
Now, I dont know why you wouldnt use past history for this but saying it as fact or "betting" (which I feel is the same) isnt the greatest way to say it.