Anyone Noticed Our run-in?

[East Stand Royal 500]

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 30,00.html

Will he be gone by then? or will SC keep him out to make sure he doesn't get injured?!

Without our Irish terrier, I'm not so sure that we will beat wolves.

[T.R.O.L.I.]

or will SC keep him out to make sure he doesn't get injured?!

Can't see this coming into it at all. The only reason SC would leave SHunt out of the starting 11 / squad would be if SC didn't think Shunt was mentally prepared for the game.

We don't need to sell SHunt - we are just bound by his £5million release clause.

And LOLz @ Sky saying Wigan have tabled a bid "in the region of £5M" - it'll be £5M exactly as most people in football now know of the release clause. Wigan could bid £25M but if Man Utd came in with a bid of £5M (not that that's likely but for illustration purposes only) the decision rests with SHunt once the release clause has been met.

[Maguire]

I'm very worried about the Wolves game because a defeat then will probably
mean defeat at QPR

Bizarre logic. I don't think its very likely that Reading will lose three in a row.

Most likely result v Wolves is a score draw (2-2?)

I'd say 2-2 is certainly not the most likely result.

[East Stand Royal 500]

Can't see this coming into it at all. The only reason SC would leave SHunt out of the starting 11 / squad would be if SC didn't think Shunt was mentally prepared for the game.

We don't need to sell SHunt - we are just bound by his £5million release clause.

He might leave him out if he thinks (like the more vociferous on this site seem to do) he can get someone better for half that money and doesn't want to risk the deal of the decade. That could mean leaving SH out and his replacement not yet available. That's why I said we might not win the Wolves game. I didn't go on to say we'd lose automatic promotion.

[Snowball]

Bizarre logic. I don't think its very likely that Reading will lose three in a row.

Not "bizarre" at all. we lost LLL, twice last season, and LLLLLLLL once

We got a PASTING at Swansea. Not the result, the way we played
and were outplayed. And we lost at Cardiff... Could quickly be
3 defeats in 4, and a wobble.

If we lost to Wolves and were eight points off them
and (worst-case scenario) four points behind Birmingham
and Sheffield United/Preston closing the gap on us in third
to 4 points, YES, I could see us losing to QPR at their place

It's a classic "blip" due to falling confidence.


I think we'll be OK with a draw against Wolves, might beat them too. Doesn't mean I don't worry.

[Maguire]

Bizarre logic. I don't think its very likely that Reading will lose three in a row.

Not "bizarre" at all. we lost LLL, twice last season, and LLLLLLLL once

When we were one of the worst teams in the division, not one of the best.

Don't see how losing to Wolves will "probably" mean we lose at QPR. Not at all.

[Ian Royal]

We're not really significantly moer likely to lose to QPR if we lose to Wolves than if we beat them.

It's more likely we'll have a 3 game losing streak, because we'll have already had two of the required loses, leaving us only one game to lose.

[Factfinder]

Most likely result v Wolves is a score draw (2-2?)

With this sort of knowledge you should get down to the bookies' with a big wedge.

[SLAMMED]

Wolves still have to play Birmingham which means one of them will drop points at least.

and we have to play both wolves and brum which means we can all drop points

Hopefully by the time we play Brum it wont matter.

[Snowball]

Most likely result v Wolves is a score draw (2-2?)

With this sort of knowledge you should get down to the bookies' with a big wedge.

You see that question mark did yer

and the "most likely" ?

35% Score Draw
30% Reading Win
25% Wolves Win
10% 0-0 draw

Still makes "score-draw" "most-likely" then divide that up into

1-1 80%
2-2 15%
3-3 5%

Or you can say "most likely" means "at least 51%

but don't forget the question mark

[Snowball]

My last big wedge was a little wedge, previous game

I had a tenner on Armstrong first goal and Reading 3-0 at 131-1

When we went 3-0 up I told my son we wouldn't win our bet, it'd be 3-1 or 4-0

But when the Watford keeper pulled off a cracking save (from Ingi?) I started to think...

But then Lita scored and cost me £1,320



as for this week, trying to guess this one is crazy


1 The Hunt factor?

Will he still be a Reading player?
If he is will he start?
If he starts will he be awful because of distractions?
If he starts will he play a blinder in the shop-window?

2 Right back factor

Is Kelly REALLY starting?
If he starts will he be nervous and cost a goal or more?
If he starts will he rise to the occasion and be brilliant, we win?
Or is Tabb lined up?
Or is Gunnarson?
Or is Bikey?

3 The "we've won away already" factor

It's quite a common thing that sides who first win away fail to win in the home return, even when against the odds
Will Wolves play brilliantly, out for revenge, or expect another defeat and play less well?

4 Are will still off-colour? WDDLL in our last five and Tuesday fielding a weaker team?

Not good home to Cardiff, poor at Saints, done at Cardiff in the cup, flattered by the Watford game
then completely outplayed by Swansea. We all have dodgy runs, but is it over, or (quite possible) we
have two more bad ones, home to Wolves and then at QPR?

Put it another way, if we were top of the league and 8-3-3 28-22 and we were going away to play a team
that was 1-2-2 6-6 with a rookie right back starting (if Kelly IS starting) wouldn't we be expecting to win?

I seriously wonder if Coppell might go a bit defensive as a draw would be an OK result, but frankly, this
is the most "open" game I can think of. I could see anything from 4-0/4-1 to 0-4

Wolves are virtually averaging 2-2 away from home. But I thought they were lucky at Bristol (first goal?)

[Snowball]

Don't see how losing to Wolves will "probably" mean we lose at QPR. Not at all.

Hey I don't WANT his to happen, but it's not an uncommon scenario. Everyone keeps
talking how Wolves "always" blow-up.

We haven't played well since the game at Birmingham, snatched a draw v Cardiff and Saints
and were badly-beaten at Swansea.


If this was any other club we'd be saying they've been found out.

And the transfer window always sets us on edge...

I worry about one more defeat because this is what it would look like

D
D
L
W
L
L

6 F 7 A (at best)

5 "points" in six games, relegation form, and then we'd seriously NEED to get something
at a side they drew at our place and is creeping up the table. A SIDE WHO BEAT WOLVES & BIRMINGHAM at Loftus Road


I'm not being pessimistic and saying this WILL happen. I'm saying that if we lose to Wolves, then it could EASILY happen.

[Stranded]

Surely that's the most obvious comment that can be made though:

If we lose on Tuesday then of course we could easily lose 3 in a row as we've already lost two.

We're no more likely to lose that particular game than any other though as each game is an exclusive event.

Anyway, sod Saturday, thats currently unimportant.

[Snowball]

We're no more likely to lose that particular game than any other though as each game is an exclusive event.


Games are NOT exclusive events. That's plain daft.

Ever heard of "a bad run" or a "good run"?

Confidence is a big deal. Nerves are a big deal.

Sides on a roll often play "above themselves"

Sides in danger often play beneath their best because of nerves or lack of confidence.


Just as when we went on the eight-straight defeats nothing would go right.

Then we scuffed a 1-0 win at Boro and immediately won again next game

[Stranded]

No, I'm sorry each game is an exclusive event whether you like it or not.

We also have a manager who plays on this fact to the nth degree.

[Snowball]

Games can be proven to be NON-independent

There's a clear positive-run effect this season.

The first few league games were all over the place DWLWLWD (3-2-2) though we could have won the first game
late on (Doyle's header) but we were still adjusting to the relegation effect, and a different team, kinds of games

But we are far more likely to win the next game after a win (51%) and win or draw is 67%, 33% fr a loss

After back-to-back wins the percentages go up again (63%) and 75% for W/D, 25% for a loss

After WWW we are 50% likely to win again, 75% to win or draw, 25% for a loss.

There is one (so far) great statistic: THIS SEASON WE HAVE NOT LOST TWO LEAGUE GAMES ON THE BOUNCE

We have won four (80%) and drawn 1 (20%) following a defeat. So we do seem to have a bounce-backability!!




==================================================================================================

You can ignore the stuff below



51% (8) AFTER 1 WIN CHANCES OF A WIN
16% (2) AFTER 1 WIN CHANCES OF A DRAW

67% LIKELY TO WIN OR DRAW FOLLOWING A WIN

33% (5) AFTER 1 WIN CHANCES OF A LOSS But 5 of our six defeats followed after a win, one after a draw!


62.5% (5) AFTER TWO CONSECUTIVE WINS CHANCES OF A WIN
12.5% (1) AFTER TWO CONSECUTIVE WINS CHANCES OF A DRAW

75% LIKELY TO WIN OR DRAW FOLLOWING TWO CONSECUTIVE WINS

25.0% (2) AFTER TWO CONSECUTIVE WINS CHANCES OF A LOSS

50% (2) CHANCES OF A WIN AFTER WWW
25% (1) CHANCES OF A DRAW AFTER WWW

75% LIKELY TO WIN OR DRAW FOLLOWING THREE CONSECUTIVE WINS

25% (1) CHANCES OF A LOSS AFTER WWW

THE LIKELIHOOD OF A DEFEAT DECLINES (33%-25%-25%) AFTER MORE WINS

======================================================================

50% (3) CHANCES OF A WIN AFTER A DRAW
17% (1) CHANCES OF A DRAW AFTER A DRAW

67% LIKELY TO WIN OR DRAW FOLLOWING A DRAW

33% (2) CHANCES OF A LOSS AFTER A DRAW



33% (2) CHANCES OF A LOSS AFTER A DRAW

75% (3) CHANCES OF A WIN AFTER A DEFEAT
25% (1) CHANCES OF A DRAW AFTER A DEFEAT

THIS SEASON WE HAVE NOT LOST TWO LEAGUE GAMES ON THE BOUNCE


CHANCES OF LOSING

033% AFTER WIN
025% AFTER WIN-WIN
025% AFTER WIN-WIN-WIN
033% AFTER DRAW
100% AFTER DRAW-DRAW
000% AFTER A DEFEAT

CHANCES OF WINNING

051% AFTER WIN
063% AFTER WIN-WIN
050% AFTER WIN-WIN-WIN
100% AFTER WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN
000% AFTER WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN

060% AFTER DRAW
000% AFTER DRAW-DRAW

100% AFTER A DEFEAT

[Snowball]

No, I'm sorry each game is an exclusive event whether you like it or not.

We also have a manager who plays on this fact to the nth degree.

You're wrong, simple as that. And that's not opinion, that's fact.

[Snowball]

No, I'm sorry each game is an exclusive event whether you like it or not.
We also have a manager who plays on this fact to the nth degree.

If games are independent, then WLD the next game should not relate to the previous result, yes?

We have W16 D6 L6

W 57%
D 21.5%
L 21.5%

57% Win
78% Win/Draw
21% Lose

Therefore, if games are independent the above percentages should apply, whatever the previous result. BUT THEY DON'T

How come then that we win 80% and draw 20% after a defeat?
Statistically, if games are "independent" we should lose 21% of these games.
OBVIOUSLY, the manager gets into the players IN REACTION TO THE DEFEAT and the players fight harder next game.

Or do you dispute the FACT that we have W4 D1 after a defeat? Independent stats say we should have lost at least one game following a loss

After a single win we are 51% likely to win (independent stats say 57%)
After WW we are 63% likely to win (independent stats say 57%)
After WWW we are back to 50% likely to win (independent stats say 57%)

After a draw our chance of winning drops to 50% (independent stats say 57%)
After a draw our chance of a draw drops to 17% (independent stats say 21%)
After a draw our chance of losing jumps to a massive 33% (independent stats say 57%)

[Snowball]

No, I'm sorry each game is an exclusive event whether you like it or not.

We also have a manager who plays on this fact to the nth degree.

Steve says:

SC: Wolves more than three points Posted on: Fri 23 Jan 2009

Royals boss Steve Coppell admits that Tuesday's home game with Wolves takes on an added significance.

Steve is gunning for victory, not just for three points but for the psychological boost it would give to all concerned.

He said, "It's a game that is probably more important psychologically than anything else.

"The implications of a result are obvious, but we would just like to get three points.

"A victory and the points would make us more effective in the division first and foremost.

"But people will read into things depending on where the three points go, that's for sure."

[Dirk Gently]

But the mentality of a SC team and the way he motivates them typically means that after a defeat he challenges them to respond, which they frequently do.

So I suspect that the statistical analysis doesn't take into account the attitude, mentality and management style of a specific team.