So... you're against empirical A/B testing, you just wanna go with your gut? Cool, whatever. My suggestion was simple and motivated by a desire to help out. Your monologue was detractive and only tangentially related, although I'm sure your intent was not entirely self aggrandizing. But thanks for the insight, I'm sure it will be useful after empirical tests. Or, hell, come up with slogany things that take more than two seconds to come up with (like my off-the-cuff suggestion of "99% player odds", which you took the time to base an argument on, but I already suggested was only a shot in the dark), and test those, too - after all, it's evidence of success versus known alternatives that matters.

That is, if anyone wants to actually test results. Which is all I suggested in the first place.