I do not quite understand the first statement, but you are talking about slap as a tribe, not matt, so how does the 1v1 say anything about slap?
Slap and matt have consisently said adrian and uksc only win because they have number advantages in game, when it became impossible to have a numerical advantage, adrian won, thier by proving he can win without a huge team on a round if ever the point was valid
Slap are a tribe, not 1 player. UKSC backed out of the tribe v tribe challenge. So the 1v1 proves nothing about slap as a whole.
UKSC lost 2 of its its better members did it not?
Plus slap were reluctant to do the tribe v tribe until Uksc fell apart, more to the point i dont follow who is better as a tribe, merely saying a point slap make about Adrian doing well via gang banging is imo disproved.
As for the second statement, either you dont understand exaggeration, or you have little actual knowledge about UKSC. Or both.
Or your too busy trying to be a forum warrior and forgot to read properly.
you said he recruited the forum community, the forum community does not necesarily play speed or feature in slap/uksc, but your suggesting he has recruited public support, which imo is ridiculous signified by mi usage of "......."
UKSC has far more members than slap. By saying that they recruited the majority if the forum is exaggeration of this point.
Why is member count relevant to me disagreeing with a single regularly used slap/matty point?
And your wrong, players and forum users are different, a person can be both but neither are obliged to be the other, so its not a exaggeration, its you using incorrect terminology
More importantly, in hypothetic terms if you over exaggerate a point and i argue the over exaggerated point is wrong, your still wrong are you not?
