Championship thread 25/26! (26 Viewers)

[Calista]

95-96 points was my own ‘projection’ which is just the running averages of our home/away form. 7 home points and 5 away points from here is probable.

When you said "We’re projected to hit 95-96 points so that’s why the Opta computers have us at 100% likelihood of promotion", I assumed you were explaining their methodology. I didn't realise you were just guessing yourself!

I'm not disputing what a good side we are, or suggesting we won't get the points. It's the fact that nobody can explain this duff figure of 100.00%.

Edit: just seen Mark82's post above with a link. Suggests that if we played out the season for the next 10,000 years (through multiple ice ages and asteroids strikes) we'd never lose the last 6 games and see a couple of the others overtake us. Fair enough, but they've still come up with a factually incorrect number.

"The main features that power the predictions are:
- The quality of the teams based on their historic performance over the last four years (?!)
- The form of the teams based on their recent performance over the last year".....

 

---

[Ccfcisparks]

When you said "We’re projected to hit 95-96 points so that’s why the Opta computers have us at 100% likelihood of promotion", I assumed you were explaining their methodology. I didn't realise you were just guessing yourself!

I'm not disputing what a good side we are, or suggesting we won't get the points. It's the fact that nobody can explain this duff figure of 100.00%.

rounding

 

[wingy]

I actually think there's a case to be made that Southampton are currently the best team in the division.
Unfortunately for them the league runs from August to May
A 6 week spell in the 2nd half of the seasondoesnt get you over the line, ditto Boro.

They're probably on the same trajectory as us with prem money backing,so sorry we're the winner's and Frank is worthy over 18months here.

 

[wingy]

I’ve obviously no idea but I get the impression, that Ipswich thought they’d piss the league this year; have had moments where they’ve looked great eg against us at home, and have then rested on their laurels again.
Team attitude definitely goes a long way…at both ends of the table.

It also seems mad to me that they and Middlesbrough have let top strikers in this league ie coburn/szmodics go without replacing them.
I’ve been really impressed by Coburn.

I'd have considered him but we have two adequate front men , always had the scale to cause problems for defender and quite a revelation in his youth not that he's ancient now.

 

[Calista]

rounding

It can't be rounding. If they do 10,000 simulations and we fail once, the answer is 99.99%. If we never fail, it's 100.00%. So it must be the latter.

 

[Ccfcisparks]

It can't be rounding. If they do 10,000 simulations and we fail once, the answer is 99.99%. If we never fail, it's 100.00%. So it must be the latter.

can you seriously see a scenario where we lose the last 6

 

[Calista]

can you seriously see a scenario where we lose the last 6

No, but this really is not the point!

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

No, but this really is not the point!

If not Opta
What would you base the chance on?

 

[wingy]

No, but this really is not the point!

I think you're stickler for detail here.

 

[Calista]

I think you're stickler for detail here.

I'll stop in a minute after I've replied to Pete

 

[oakey]

Has it been mentioned that we will definitely finish top six now. I know we want more but still, it's an achievement

 

[Calista]

If not Opta
What would you base the chance on?

I wouldn't. It was other people choosing to quote Opta numbers and arranging open top bus tours and spending the Prem money when we still needed a few good results.

Before Friday, we were still only a couple of bad weekends away from it all getting pretty tight again, and Opta's numbers would presumably have plummeted in a fortnight from 99.94 to 75 or something.

As it is, the weekend is going splendidly!

 

[Ccfcisparks]

I wouldn't. It was other people choosing to quote Opta numbers and arranging open top bus tours and spending the Prem money when we still needed a few good results.

Before Friday, we were still only a couple of bad weekends away from it all getting pretty tight again, and Opta's numbers would presumably have plummeted in a fortnight from 99.94 to 75 or something.

As it is, the weekend is going splendidly!

They didn’t even get to 75% when we drew to oxford

 

[Calista]

Has it been mentioned that we will definitely finish top six now. I know we want more but still, it's an achievement

We want nothing less than the title now, even if Doug sacks Lampard for missing out on the playoffs.

 

[wingy]

I wouldn't. It was other people choosing to quote Opta numbers and arranging open top bus tours and spending the Prem money when we still needed a few good results.

Before Friday, we were still only a couple of bad weekends away from it all getting pretty tight again, and Opta's numbers would presumably have plummeted in a fortnight from 99.94 to 75 or something.

As it is, the weekend is going splendidly!

But we the fans pass on that belief,obvs not all of it but just add 10-15 % ,so that has to count for something?

 

[shmmeee]

When you said "We’re projected to hit 95-96 points so that’s why the Opta computers have us at 100% likelihood of promotion", I assumed you were explaining their methodology. I didn't realise you were just guessing yourself!

I'm not disputing what a good side we are, or suggesting we won't get the points. It's the fact that nobody can explain this duff figure of 100.00%.

Edit: just seen Mark82's post above with a link. Suggests that if we played out the season for the next 10,000 years (through multiple ice ages and asteroids strikes) we'd never lose the last 6 games and see a couple of the others overtake us. Fair enough, but they've still come up with a factually incorrect number.

"The main features that power the predictions are:
- The quality of the teams based on their historic performance over the last four years (?!)
- The form of the teams based on their recent performance over the last year".....

Is it saying we’re 100% getting promoted or 100% of the time their simulation has us promoted cos they’re two different things.

 

[Liquid Gold]

Wrong, I think you are misinterpreting it. They were happy to put 99.94% so they could easily put 99.99%.

We are 100.00% with OPTA because of the 10,000 times they simulated the rest of the season we didn’t get promoted precisely 0 times.

 

[Calista]

Is it saying we’re 100% getting promoted or 100% of the time their simulation has us promoted cos they’re two different things.

It appears to be the latter, although Mucca threw in a wild card alternative explanation earlier which turned out to be a phantom!

People lap up the numbers, but IMO they are incredibly dubious, and my experience with Labroke's last week (post #21,209) reinforces that.

 

[Liquid Gold]

Regarding Hellberg I increasingly think he’s a poor manager.

It’s one thing getting players to play pretty football but it counts for nothing if that doesn’t translate to results. Baring his purple patch the results have been awful and he’s taken them backwards imo.

 

[Ccfcisparks]

It appears to be the latter, although Mucca threw in a wild card alternative explanation earlier which turned out to be a phantom!

People lap up the numbers, but IMO they are incrediblyl dubious, and my experience with Labroke's last week (post #21,209) reinforces that.

why do the bookies have us at 500/1 on to get promoted

 

[Calista]

why do the bookies have us at 500/1 on to get promoted

Same reason as last week, to close down the market. Even last week, Ladbrokes wanted you to give them a grand for a return of £1.

Yet for the reverse bet they offered me 16/1, which was pretty much what I would have expected allowing for them to make profits.

 

[Calista]

Same reason as last week, to close down the market. Even last week, Ladbrokes wanted you to give them a grand for a return of £1.

Yet for the reverse bet they offered me 16/1, which was pretty much what I would have expected allowing for them to make profits.

(I told them to stuff it of course!)

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Is it saying we’re 100% getting promoted or 100% of the time their simulation has us promoted cos they’re two different things.

The second

 

[Lamps]

Southampton playing Ipswich three days after their FA cup semi final, think they will be fucked like we were after the Man U semi final.

Both sides will be knackered by then. It's going to be walking football sponsored by Sky.

 

[Lamps]

At nearly 2am yes

Look, it's been said quite a few times on here that Opta run their model 10,000 times and then report the percentage of simulations where we end up promoted. Their currently quoted "100.00%" figure clearly shows that isn't the case.

It seems much more like Mucca says - they've worked out how many points their model thinks we're likely to get, and because no other team can get that many, we are 100% promoted. That's very different, and pretty deceptive - they think we'll get the required points, therefore we are already there.

It explains why even before Friday's games Opta predicted less than a 1 in 1600 chance that we wouldn't go up. It was clearly nonsense, so out of interest I asked Labroke's (offering 1-1000 ON for promotion on their website) to give me odds for not getting promoted. I never bet against CCFC, but if they'd come back with several hundred to one, I'd have been sorely tempted. They quoted me 16-1, that's SIXTEEN to one! 100 times different from Opta's implied odds, and far more realistic IMO. Personally I think before Friday we were around 95% likely to do it (not 99.94%), and now we are into near-certainty territory.

The bookies don't give odds as they should be or they wouldn't make a profit. They offer odds that will make them a profit regardless of the final result.

Why don't you work out a set of results that would leave us in 3rd at the end of the season. Then do an accumulator on the odds. We would be longer odds each time to lose. The odds would end up being massive.

 

[wingy]

The bookies don't give odds as they should be or they wouldn't make a profit. They offer odds that will make them a profit regardless of the final result.

Why don't you work out a set of results that would leave us in 3rd at the end of the season. Then do an accumulator on the odds. We would be longer odds each time to lose. The odds would end up being massive.

Is opta comparing 10,000 of everybody's result's when considering ours?

 

[StrettoBoy]

I have just spotted something interesting when perusing the BBC’s list of the top 31 goalscorers in the Championship this season, being those who have scored 9 goals or more:

Championship Top Scorers - BBC Sport

Championship top scorers. Showing assists, time on pitch and the shots on and off target.

www.bbc.co.uk

It is sometimes difficult to measure the effectiveness of individual players because (due to injuries, suspensions or for other reasons) they will not all have played the same number of minutes. The total number of goals which they have each scored is therefore arguably a poor measure of performance.

A more precise metric might therefore be to look at how many minutes it takes each player, on average, to score a goal. The fewer minutes the better on this basis because, for example, a player who takes 90 minutes to score a goal will be scoring at the rate of a goal a game (strictly, per 90 minutes played) whereas a player who takes 180 minutes will be scoring a goal every other game (strictly, per 180 minutes played).

On this basis, the three players with the best records are:

1st Brandon Thomas-Asante (132 minutes)
2nd Ellis Simms (140 minutes)
3rd Haji Wright (142 minutes)

Anyone notice something these players have in common?

Obviously, it helps that they all play for the best and highest-scoring team in the division - and I’m sure the one which creates the most chances - but they still have to put the ball in the net.

 

[Ccfcisparks]

I have just spotted something interesting when perusing the BBC’s list of the top 31 goalscorers in the Championship this season, being those who have scored 9 goals or more:

Championship Top Scorers - BBC Sport

Championship top scorers. Showing assists, time on pitch and the shots on and off target.

www.bbc.co.uk

It is sometimes difficult to measure the effectiveness of individual players because (due to injuries, suspensions or for other reasons) they will not all have played the same number of minutes. The total number of goals which they have each scored is therefore arguably a poor measure of performance.

A more precise metric might therefore be to look at how many minutes it takes each player, on average, to score a goal. The fewer minutes the better on this basis because, for example, a player who takes 90 minutes to score a goal will be scoring at the rate of a goal a game (strictly, per 90 minutes played) whereas a player who takes 180 minutes will be scoring a goal every other game (strictly, per 180 minutes played).

On this basis, the three players with the best records are:

1st Brandon Thomas-Asante (132 minutes)
2nd Ellis Simms (140 minutes)
3rd Haji Wright (142 minutes)

Anyone notice something these players have in common?

Obviously, it helps that they all play for the best and highest-scoring team in the division - and I’m sure the one which creates the most chances - but they still have to put the ball in the net.

it would be lovely if we could get 5 players on double figures

 

[Terry_dactyl]

I'd have considered him but we have two adequate front men , always had the scale to cause problems for defender and quite a revelation in his youth not that he's ancient now.

I’d never heard of him but he looks like he’s got a lot to his game.

 

[Calista]

Is opta comparing 10,000 of everybody's result's when considering ours?

They would have to.

 

[Calista]

The bookies don't give odds as they should be or they wouldn't make a profit. They offer odds that will make them a profit regardless of the final result.

Of course they do, I've already said that. But that doesn't explain last week's discrepancy between Ladbrokes' 16/1 and Opta's 1600/1!!

In reality I'm sure we were comfortably at least 95% there but we still needed perhaps 3 results with 7 to play. We were in a massively strong position - some would have said 100/1 to miss out, but to simulate that we'd only fail 6 times out of 10,000??

Different picture now, near certain because two ding-dong matches went the right way.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Of course they do, I've already said that. But that doesn't explain last week's discrepancy between Ladbrokes' 16/1 and Opta's 1600/1!!

In reality I'm sure we were comfortably at least 95% there but we still needed perhaps 3 results with 7 to play. We were in a massively strong position - some would have said 100/1 to miss out, but to simulate that we'd only fail 6 times out of 10,000??

Different picture now, near certain because two ding-dong matches went the right way.

As they have for most of the season
Lucky teams win lots

 

[Lamps]

Different picture now, near certain because two ding-dong matches went the right way.

It isn't exactly a different picture. It's the same picture just a frame later. The top position was between 4 sides. 1 wasn't playing and the other 2 were playing each other. The top side was at home where they're very strong. As you now say it's just about over after just 1 match day out of 7 going as expected.

Last time on this subject with you as you won't do the calculations but keep asking questions about the calculations. For us to not to be promoted we would have to keep losing and 2 sides keep winning. We're normally about 7/2 to lose. Let's call the other 2 sides 6/4 to win although normally priced higher. Just 4 match days they win we lose gives you odds of over 625,000/1 on an accumulator.

 

[Sick Boy]

Regarding Hellberg I increasingly think he’s a poor manager.

It’s one thing getting players to play pretty football but it counts for nothing if that doesn’t translate to results. Baring his purple patch the results have been awful and he’s taken them backwards imo.

He's obviously been overhyped by the media and Boro fans - he's 100% taken them backwards as well.

 

[Calista]

It isn't exactly a different picture. It's the same picture just a frame later.

So if the two games had gone the other way (which could easily have happened) and Boro were 6 points behind instead of 12, the picture would be the same?