Other games (2024/25)

[Pata]

43 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 games in a I think you're mistaking a rejection of your premise -at the time and now - for a basic misunderstanding of probability tbh.  

 

This Liverpool team has won 9 games in a row countless times in the last few seasons, they've been in these high pressure clutch situations loads, did this 2 years ago, have had over 90+ points a few times, winning titles and trophies. Then there's the favourable fixtures and players returning from injury.

 

The idea all of that and other factors can be reduced to a 5-10% probability or similar solely because of their poorer form earlier this season is your or whoever else's call to make, but telling people that have pretty clearly explained why they think it's a very obviously bad call that it's just that they don't understand basic probability, as if the figures are indisputable, or that it's illogical and based on fear is a bit nauseating like.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I try to make this as basic as possibly. Let's make Liverpool 80% favourites in all those remaining 9 games. It's way too high but I'm trying to keep it simple, for example they were 60% favourites today against dreadful Leicester. As 80% favourites the probability of them winning all those 9 games is 13.4%. 

 

Let's lower that to 70% which is still way too high and the probability drops down to 4%. This is very basic probability math that works in anything in life. All the bookies in the world know the history of Liverpool and how good they can be but that doesn't make it anymore likely to happen. Them winning 9 in a row in the past doesn't make them winning 9 in a row now anymore likely and their defense and midfield are nowhere near as good as they used to be few years ago. I also have trouble understanding why your 'football is chaos' theory doesn't apply to them.

 

It's still about coinflip that they win their two remaining games, fair play if they do win 9 games in a row but it was still massively and extremely unlikely to happen even if it happens.

[La Parka]

Faes was an absolute liability last night. 

[buzza]

1 hour ago, La Parka said:

Faes was an absolute liability last night. 

Aye, the ball that was in the air so long and he let it drop behind him so that Luis could get in behind him. Schoolboy defending would have been better!

[Kid Icarus]

11 hours ago, Pata said:

 

I try to make this as basic as possibly. Let's make Liverpool 80% favourites in all those remaining 9 games. It's way too high but I'm trying to keep it simple, for example they were 60% favourites today against dreadful Leicester. As 80% favourites the probability of them winning all those 9 games is 13.4%. 

 

Let's lower that to 70% which is still way too high and the probability drops down to 4%. This is very basic probability math that works in anything in life. All the bookies in the world know the history of Liverpool and how good they can be but that doesn't make it anymore likely to happen. Them winning 9 in a row in the past doesn't make them winning 9 in a row now anymore likely and their defense and midfield are nowhere near as good as they used to be few years ago. I also have trouble understanding why your 'football is chaos' theory doesn't apply to them.

 

It's still about coinflip that they win their two remaining games, fair play if they do win 9 games in a row but it was still massively and extremely unlikely to happen even if it happens.

 

I thought I had been pretty clear tbh, but obviously not.

 

So just to clarify, yes, I understand probability and the multiplication rule, I and others are saying that using that is flawed for the reasons I've gone through. This isn’t anything really controversial, they’re known, obvious limitations.

 

If you were just explaining the basics of probability to me because, as you've made pretty clear, you think we're all thick, fair enough, but you've clearly missed the point being made while you were fixating on having such a low opinion of everyone.

 

Probability being subjective is an obvious disadvantage for a start, but the multiplication rule is also only really useful for predicting simple outcomes based on known probabilities and values. It’s not really useful for predicting things like winning runs or finishing positions in football because of the contextual factors that have been mentioned time and again. You can’t just reduce it to a calculation based on known values because not only do we not know and the probabilities they're based on aren't reliable, but you also need to take into account a wide range of factors like each team’s history, form, fixtures, injuries, luck, psychology etc. 

 

Yes, it's partly a case of looking at those probability tables and making a judgement call based on experience of previous situations in the Premier League and with certain teams in particular, but all of the factors that have been listed numerous times do matter as part of complex statistical models too. If they didn’t matter, statistics and data analytics wouldn’t exist as an industry.

 

Liverpool have had 9 game winning sequences 14 times in the last 3 seasons and have a wealth of experience in these situations. That along with other factors demonstrably matter. Bear in mind though, what’s being overlooked here is that Liverpool reaching the CL wasn’t even dependent upon them winning 9 games in a row, that was just something that some people thought had a good chance of happening.

 

The fundamental problem raised about these probability tables like FiveThirtyEight’s weren’t because a 12% chance of Liverpool winning 9 games was ridiculous, it’s that a 12% chance of them making the Champions League was ridiculous and a 95% chance of us making the CL was ridiculous.  

 

Maybe you were just using the multiplication rule as a basic way of explaining and I’m sure FiveThirtyEight and others adjust or factor these variables in to their models, but the point is that the outcome probabilities looked so obviously wrong that it suggests they haven't been factored in enough or at all. A 95% and 12% chance of Newcastle and Liverpool making the CL was even on the surface and with 'football is chaos' in mind, then and now, clearly flawed in a fundamental way.

 

 

 

Edited May 16, 2023 by Kid Icarus

[madras]

24 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

I thought I had been pretty clear tbh, but obviously not.

 

So just to clarify, yes, I understand probability and the multiplication rule, I and others are saying that using that is flawed for the reasons I've gone through. This isn’t anything really controversial, they’re known, obvious limitations.

 

If you were just explaining the basics of probability to me because, as you've made pretty clear, you think we're all thick, fair enough, but you've clearly missed the point being made while you were fixating on having such a low opinion of everyone.

 

Probability being subjective is an obvious disadvantage for a start, but the multiplication rule is also only really useful for predicting simple outcomes based on known probabilities and values. It’s not really useful for predicting things like winning runs or finishing positions in football because of the contextual factors that have been mentioned time and again. You can’t just reduce it to a calculation based on known values because not only do we not know and the probabilities they're based on aren't reliable, but you also need to take into account a wide range of factors like each team’s history, form, fixtures, injuries, luck, psychology etc. 

 

Yes, it's partly a case of looking at those probability tables and making a judgement call based on experience of previous situations in the Premier League and with certain teams in particular, but all of the factors that have been listed numerous times do matter as part of complex statistical models too. If they didn’t matter, statistics and data analytics wouldn’t exist as an industry.

 

Liverpool have had 9 game winning sequences 14 times in the last 3 seasons and have a wealth of experience in these situations. That along with other factors demonstrably matter. Bear in mind though, what’s being overlooked here is that Liverpool reaching the CL wasn’t even dependent upon them winning 9 games in a row, that was just something that some people thought had a good chance of happening.

 

The fundamental problem raised about these probability tables like FiveThirtyEight’s weren’t because a 12% chance of Liverpool winning 9 games was ridiculous, it’s that a 12% chance of them making the Champions League was ridiculous and a 95% chance of us making the CL was ridiculous.  

 

Maybe you were just using the multiplication rule as a basic way of explaining and I’m sure FiveThirtyEight and others adjust or factor these variables in to their models, but the point is that the outcome probabilities looked so obviously wrong that it suggests they haven't been factored in enough or at all. A 95% and 12% chance of Newcastle and Liverpool making the CL was even on the surface and with 'football is chaos' in mind, then and now, clearly flawed in a fundamental way.

 

 

 

 

Behold, the heir of htt.

 

 

tl;Dr

 

 

[Pata]

I’m using the multiplication to show how unlikely something that’s deemed very likely is to happen 9 times in a row. I didn’t realise that it doesn’t somehow apply to football. I have no idea why you think the outcome probabilities were so badly wrong when Liverpool have won seven games in a row and still need help from other teams. Seemed a pretty long shot then to begin with?

Bookies saying Liverpool winning a game 6 times out of 10 is just stupid and thick and in reality it’s something like 98-100% due to their experience and stuff? Somehow no one else in the world has noticed this with their thick models and bookies are still raking it in when in reality everyone could be millionaires just by betting on Liverpool? I urge you to start betting as you clearly know better than the rest of the world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 16, 2023 by Pata

[Kid Icarus]

24 minutes ago, Pata said:

I’m using the multiplication to show how unlikely something that’s deemed very likely is to happen 9 times in a row. I didn’t realise that it doesn’t somehow apply to football. I have no idea why you think the outcome probabilities were so badly wrong when Liverpool have won seven games in a row and still need help from other teams. Seemed a pretty long shot then to begin with?

So you think bookies saying Liverpool winning a game 6 times out of 10 is just stupid and thick and in reality it’s something like 98-100% due to their experience and stuff? Somehow no one else in the world has noticed this with their thick models and bookies are still raking it in when in reality everyone could be millionaires just by betting on Liverpool? I urge you to start betting as you clearly know better than the rest of the world.

 

Sorry, so you're now trying to say that, actually, the people you've been calling thick in all of this - for saying that these probability models are flawed - it's them calling the bookies and models thick?  Nice try, but obviously no. 

 

No idea why you keep bringing up bookies odds either like. As I say, I don't really gamble, especially at the moment, and Ponsaelius has been and has made a fortune, so what's your point? Even then, bookies odds also take non-probability based factors into account. This isn't anyone thinking they know better than the rest of the world, it's pointing out that the rest of the world (at least within statistics and data analysis) already knows about the limitations and disadvantages of the multiplication rule - none of this is controversial. 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 16, 2023 by Kid Icarus

[Deuce]

please let this season end

[Pata]

I really struggle to even understand your point so we just have to agree to disagree. You think giving probability to a football result is impossible and I think you can give probability to absolutely anything and it being off a few percents doesn't really matter in the long run.

 

gg

[Kid Icarus]

1 minute ago, Pata said:

I really struggle to even understand your point so we just have to agree to disagree. You think giving probability to a football result is impossible and I think you can give probability to absolutely anything and it being off a few percents doesn't really matter in the long run.

 

gg

No, that's obviously a strawman.

 

Saying that a probability is flawed or really exaggerated isn't at all saying it's impossible.

[54]

Luton winning.

[Big Geordie]

Mackems behind

 

1-0 Luton

[Unbelievable]

Oops

[Dr.Spaceman]

FACKING CHEAT

[Geordie Ahmed]

Luton just need to cross at every chance they get, they are a much bigger side

[Sima]

Get in.  Now kill them.

[Anderson]

Get in!  

[Kid Icarus]

Literally happens every week doesn't it? Followed by them ending up winning

[NUFCDoog]

Atmosphere is mental, Lutons fans seem like absolute lunatics, definitely got the potential to boil over this

[Geordie Ahmed]

Mackems screaming for a penalty 

[Geordie Ahmed]

Initial save from the Luton keeper was class

 

Not a penalty

[Pilko]

Ball blasted at the fellas hand from a couple yards away with his arm down by his side. Not a pen 

[Dr.Spaceman]

Luton crowd are properly up for this

[bowlingcrofty]

Worrying. 

[Geordie Ahmed]

Mackems play the better football out of these two sides, which I think will ultimately make the difference