89 Points?

[Hoop Blah]

So you're still stupid

Snowball, you seem to have slowed down on responding to questions and observations on your stats the last couple of days...

Do you not have any comments or further stats in reply to the questions raised over your analysis?

[cmonurz]

So you're still stupid

If we score a point or more more than the 3rd place side we'll go up. FACT.

[Snowball]

That's called a truism, and it's something that is "after the fact"


Now check the last 15 years in this league and see how often the second side is ONLY 1 point above third.


You still don't seem to be able to grasp the fact (it takes intelligence) that sides in second usually create a gap
to third... and the reason for that is, that if they got less points, others would get more.

I know it's tough,but try.

[Arch]

That's called a truism, and it's something that is "after the fact"


Now check the last 15 years in this league and see how often the second side is ONLY 1 point above third.


You still don't seem to be able to grasp the fact (it takes intelligence) that sides in second usually create a gap
to third... and the reason for that is, that if they got less points, others would get more.

I know it's tough,but try.

As you know, I don't mind the stats, but the highlighted point is pretty insignificant. Whether we get 80 or 90 has no bearing on how many Cardiff or Wolves will get, and since the remaining Birmingham game is the last game of the season the number of points we get will only be as relevant as the result on the day.

[Arch]

By the way, I had it in my head that the year Wigan went up it was very narrowly which is true - last day thrashing of lowly opposition put them up with 85 points. They went through a spell in November December with a record of W 2 D 2 L 5, and another wobble during March. Just a reminder to keep a stiff upper lip. When we trounce lowly opposition on the last day of the season, all the dull and uninspiring games will be forgotten. Then it'll be time to sharpen the knives over Sir Tightwad's fiscal policies.

[Snowball]

THIS CENTURY no club in second has beaten third by a single point.

Twice 3rd has beaten second by TWO pints but the average is SIX POINTS

That.as I keep tryig to explain is because they take points OFF the chasing pack

Here are the results since 2000/01


99 98 94 94 106 88 81 94.3 TOP
89 92 86 87 090 86 79 87.0 SECOND
86 80 79 85 081 84 75 81.4 THIRD


10 06 08 07 16 02 02 7.3 AVERAGE POINTS CLEAR OF SECOND
03 12 07 02 11 02 04 5.9 AVERAGE POINTS CLEAR OF THIRD


For the 99th time, yes, of course, AFTER THE FACT we can say that second only needs to beat third
by a single point (or have better goal difference)... but in aiming at a total you need not to think
that way because 87 is required AND A GAP OF SIX.

[Snowball]

That's called a truism, and it's something that is "after the fact"
Now check the last 15 years in this league and see how often the second side is ONLY 1 point above third.
You still don't seem to be able to grasp the fact (it takes intelligence) that sides in second usually create a gap
to third... and the reason for that is, that if they got less points, others would get more.
I know it's tough,but try.

As you know, I don't mind the stats, but the highlighted point is pretty insignificant. Whether we get 80 or 90 has no bearing on how many Cardiff or Wolves will get, and since the remaining Birmingham game is the last game of the season the number of points we get will only be as relevant as the result on the day.

Agreed, with Cardiff (but crucially not with Birmingham) but our two draws with Cardiff may well
be the two games which ultimately deny Cardiff second place.


NOT LOSING at home to Birmingham, Sheffield United and Bristol will also be important
results because they deny these teams the chance or outside chance of catching us

[cmonurz]

That's called a truism, and it's something that is "after the fact"


Now check the last 15 years in this league and see how often the second side is ONLY 1 point above third.


You still don't seem to be able to grasp the fact (it takes intelligence) that sides in second usually create a gap
to third... and the reason for that is, that if they got less points, others would get more.

I know it's tough,but try.

We could lose to Barnsley and Bristol City, and go the rest of the season undefeated. Birmingham could lose to Forest and Southampton, and go the rest of the season undefeated. None of these defeats would have the direct impact on the top places that you are talking about.

We need one point more than whoever is 3rd. And that's it.

Yes, sometimes the team in 2nd has taken points of those in 3rd and 4th. But it isn't a necessary condition of finishing 2nd, and it doesn't always happen.

[Hoop Blah]

That's called a truism, and it's something that is "after the fact"


Now check the last 15 years in this league and see how often the second side is ONLY 1 point above third.


You still don't seem to be able to grasp the fact (it takes intelligence) that sides in second usually create a gap
to third... and the reason for that is, that if they got less points, others would get more.

I know it's tough,but try.

How ironic that Snowball is trying to put some context into what is a 100% true fact.

Perhaps the penny is starting to drop...

[RobRoyal]

THIS CENTURY no club in second has beaten third by a single point.

So that means a team that does score one more point than the 3rd place team doesn't go up?

We're talking about what we need to go up. Not what teams that have gone up have tended to get.

[Snowball]

You are very stupid.

[cmonurz]

Snowball, if we finish 3 points ahead of Birmingham, why the presumption on your part that that three point gap results from our games with Birmingham?

[Stranded]

So for example, we match Wolves point for point over the rest of the season and say Brum go past us both - Wolves will have one more point than us despite us taking 6 off them - thus they finish 2nd.

Just because no team in god knows how long has finished 2nd by 1pt doesn't stop the fact that all you need is one more point than the team finishing 3rd to go up - of course, you don't set that as a target which is why it very rarely happens.

[Hoop Blah]

You are very stupid.

For someone who started out trying to be such an intelligent informed poster who only dealt in facts and substantiated opinion you've very quickly shown yourself up!

What happened to your desire for informed debate and a wish for people to have grown up conversations instead of rants and entranched slagging matches?

[Arch]

Twice 3rd has beaten second by TWO pints but the average is SIX POINTS

That.as I keep tryig to explain is because they take points OFF the chasing pack

... but in aiming at a total you need not to think that way because 87 is required AND A GAP OF SIX.

The bold part is what your stats don't show. That's pure conjecture. As a result, there's nothing in your analysis to show that a gap of six is required.

[Mr Angry]

I can understand where Snowball is going with this, and to a degree, I agree with him/her.

However.....

....at the moment its all irrelevant because what has happened in the past 31 games is no guarantee that it can be extrapolated into the remaining 15 games; the biggest word in all of that hugely detailed analysis is, of course, IF.

IF we carry on at the same rate...

IF Cardiff fail to win their games in hand...

IF Swansea continue their run....

Personally I take the Coppellian view of all of this, also known as the Stockdale Paradox; just focus on each day and do the best you can. Do that, and things will work out as best as it can do because we hve no control over what happens to others (when we aren't playing them).

[Arch]

My focusing on doing the best I can each game will have zero effect on the outcome. FACT.

[Mr Angry]

It will. Trust me - I'm a salesman.

[Snowball]

Snowball, if we finish 3 points ahead of Birmingham, why the presumption on your part that that three point gap results from our games with Birmingham?

I don't believe that question.

Answer Birmingham 1-3 Reading


You do agree we got 3 points and they got zero?

and if we beat them by three points, that means, over the other 45 games
we had identical points?

Go on, try thinking.

[Snowball]

You are very stupid.

For someone who started out trying to be such an intelligent informed poster who only dealt in facts and substantiated opinion you've very quickly shown yourself up!
What happened to your desire for informed debate and a wish for people to have grown up conversations instead of rants and entranched slagging matches?

Because people mostly seem capable of basic intelligence and basic analysis.

Question 1. Do you think I don't know that A+1 is greater than A?

Question 2. Do you think I don't know that 89 is more than 88?


Of course I do, but the 3rd +1 issue contains a huge error of logic, but it seems no-one on this list can see that.

OF COURSE it is true, that after 46 games, if we have one point more than the club in 3rd we will go up

But earlier in the thread people, people manipulated that after-the-fact fact, that TRUISM, and ERRONEOUSLY
believed that this meant, all you needed to do is look at the average for third place and add one point.

That's a false assumption. We have to meet and exceed the average that has been necessary for second.

It's not that long since 90 points was not enough for second.

My saying "You're stupid" is not an insult. It's a view of actuality based on reading posts.