bunky666 said:
Man, I've gotta ride some more coasters. I've only been on two of these.
I've only got 4 :(
The amusement park rises bold and stark..kids are huddled on the beach in a mist
http://support.gktw.org/site/TR/CoastingForKids/General?px=1248054&...fr_id=1372
billb7581 said:
So only 4 or 5 decent wooden roller coasters have been built since the Taft-Hartley Act was passed?I like Phoenix and all, but it's amazing to me that it continues to rank this highly with all the technological advancements in the last 66 years
What do technological advancements have to do with how great a ride is? And besides, Phoenix is the only coaster in the top ten that's older than 13 years.
Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.
Phoenix ranks so highly for several reasons: First, it's located at Knoebels. Second, it's *impeccably* maintained. Third, in terms of layout, it doesn't try to do anything fancy (other than double-up/double-down)...what it does, it does perfectly. Fourth, it has the best trains outside of CI Cyclone. Fifth...Kozmo!
I really enjoyed the ride, and gave it a 5 on my track record, but I do suspect that a lot of people place it in such high regard because of their love for the park. Nothing wrong with that, but it seems rational.
Jeff - Editor - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog
ApolloAndy said:
Perhaps I can articulate the heart of the issue:
The math can tell you what margin of error you will have for a given sample space. This is not up for debate.
The math cannot tell you what margin of error is acceptable for your application. This is a judgment call.
Sorry to go back to this, but I lost track of this discussion as we went out of town right at this time.
But...
YES!
Like the others said, you managed to articulate the two levels of doing this quite nicely.
You must be logged in to post