Yeah, of course ... based on you constantly crying about Wellinger winning the first competition, it was completely obvious that you were joking. "... you must be very sad person ..." ... yeah, that sounds like someone who is ready to lead a calm discussion. Your last point is complete nonsense anyway, it doesn't matter whether i am completely calm or completely furious right now, i gave an argument and you weren't willing to discuss, blaming it on me being angry, which is of course an easy way to escape a discussion. Sadly you aren't willing to discuss, so it will probably remain a mystery forever, but i'd still like to ask what "... you should be happy for this gold ..." is supposed to mean? Are you saying that i should be happy about Stoch winning gold or what? The "... and judges points ..." part is a complete mystery as well to me. You are hinting something but then don't follow up on it in any way, so what exactly is your point? Right after i claim that Stoch got overscored, you suddenly come up with the idea that Wellinger got overscored as well? So basically your strategy to counter my argument is just saying the same i said about Stoch but now about Wellinger? Very creative indeed ...
I will never understand how any polish fan can cry about an athlete of an other nation getting lucky with the wind in this season, given how lucky Stoch got at the 4-hills tournament (unlike you i even used actual data to support my claim), of course Stoch/Hula not winning a medal on the normal hill also had nothing to do with the wind, i gave proof earlier, so i won't say the same over and over again, but Wellinger jumped 113.5 m to win the gold in the second round, although even 109 m very likely would have been enough to win the gold, so he was just better than anyone else that day. Stoch won the gold by about 3 points on a LARGE HILL while Wellinger won by about 8 points on a NORMAL HILL, but yeah, it was Wellinger's victory that was lucky ...