How many points will it take?

[Rawlie19]

But then 3rd would have been 4th!

This really isn't difficult. Are there more women on here than I had previously thought, or something?

Say we're 4th, and then get 1 more point than the team in 3rd, we'd be 3rd and they'd be 4th. Tell me I'm wrong.

It's all about finishing position at the end of the season - in your example that team wouldn't be third.

If, at the end of the season, you have 1 more point than the team in third, you are second (or even first).

Tell me I'm wrong.

All I was saying is that if you were aiming to beat the team in 3rd by 1 point all you'd do is push them down to 4th and take 3rd yourself. I do get it btw, just there are 2 different ways of putting the argument. I do get that now that you're looking at the table at the end of the season and saying we need to be 1 point better off than 3rd. Ah french connection it. I can't be arsed with this argument anymore. I got it from the beginning btw, just that the way it was worded wasn't clear. 3rd place still has 2 teams above them. It's the team currently in second you want more than 1 point than. And I still continue! Shutting up now. You bore me with your want to argue constantly.

[Rawlie19]

Let's just go for 3 points every game and hopefully we'll be in the top 2 come May. That's all I care about.

[CMRoyal]

I got it from the beginning btw, just that the way it was worded wasn't clear.

That's not unusual for my posts (assuming I'm one of those you are referring to). I am trying to improve my writing skills, but I'm way out of practice these days.

Anyway, there's no harm in clarifying these points. I'm sure we can all do it with a smile on our faces.

[East Stand Royal 500]

Let's just go for 3 points every game and hopefully we'll be in the top 2 come May. That's all I care about.

3 points from every game and it would be a racing certainty. If we win every game, Birmingham can't overtake us and by tomorrow evening we'll be only 2 points behind Wolves. That would almost as certainly put us top come May.

What are the chances of us winning all our remaining games and Wolves winning everything except the game against us? Virtually zero, I should think so yes, if we succeed in getting 3 points from each of the remaining games, I confidently predict we will come out on top!

[Rawlie19]

Let's just go for 3 points every game and hopefully we'll be in the top 2 come May. That's all I care about.

3 points from every game and it would be a racing certainty. If we win every game, Birmingham can't overtake us and by tomorrow evening we'll be only 2 points behind Wolves. That would almost as certainly put us top come May.

What are the chances of us winning all our remaining games and Wolves winning everything except the game against us? Virtually zero, I should think so yes, if we succeed in getting 3 points from each of the remaining games, I confidently predict we will come out on top!

What I meant was if we GO for 3 points every game then we'll get more than if we say went for 1 point in a few of the tougher ones. We won't win them all, but I'd like us to try is all. hehe. 108 points would surely win the league though...

[Ian Royal]

All I was saying is that if you were aiming to beat the team in 3rd by 1 point all you'd do is push them down to 4th and take 3rd yourself. I do get it btw, just there are 2 different ways of putting the argument. I do get that now that you're looking at the table at the end of the season and saying we need to be 1 point better off than 3rd. Ah french connection it. I can't be arsed with this argument anymore. I got it from the beginning btw, just that the way it was worded wasn't clear. 3rd place still has 2 teams above them. It's the team currently in second you want more than 1 point than. And I still continue! Shutting up now. You bore me with your want to argue constantly.

But you're not taking a team and sandwiching it into the league, you are stating what A team, would have had to get to finish above the team that finished third that year. Anything else is too complex and essentially involves re-running the whole season, defying the whole point in the first place!

It has nothing to do with a new team. The second placed team only needed a better GD than the third placed team in any of those years, so 85 would have been good enough for any of those seasons.

There are so many games in a season, you can redistribute the missing points in such a way as to not change the top 6, should you want to be anal enough to want to do that.

Once again, to finish second, you only have to have the same points as everyone below that position and a better goal difference. Not get the same points as the club that actually got second.

[riverroyal]

Here's an interesting stat . . ..

If we beat Wolves tomorrow night that will be 12 home wins, the same number both Stoke and West Brom won at home in the league all last season when they both finished in the top 2

[Snowball]

[
All I was saying is that if you were aiming to beat the team in 3rd by 1 point all you'd do is push them down to 4th and take 3rd yourself. I do get it btw, just there are 2 different ways of putting the argument. I do get that now that you're looking at the table at the end of the season and saying we need to be 1 point better off than 3rd. Ah french connection it. I can't be arsed with this argument anymore. I got it from the beginning btw, just that the way it was worded wasn't clear. 3rd place still has 2 teams above them. It's the team currently in second you want more than 1 point than. And I still continue! Shutting up now. You bore me with your want to argue constantly.

RAWLIE, you are RIGHT (and I'm right) and the rest of them are numpties who don't know real logic

Your logic is impeccable.

It is INCORRECT to say that we need what third normally gets +1

and what's more it's easy to prove

You look at the last years (like I did) look at the third place and add one point.

And guess what, you are third because second got MORE than one point more than third!

[Rawlie19]

I'm bored.

[Snowball]

LESSON FOR NUMPTIES


81 88 106 94 94 98 99 FIRST
79 86 090 87 86 92 89 SECOND

=======================
75 84 081 85 79 80 86 THIRD

Now all of you bar one seem to think that "all that is required" is to get 1 point more than those thirds


81 88 106 94 94 98 99 FIRST
79 86 090 87 86 92 89 SECOND
76 85 082 86 80 81 87 THIRD PLUS ONE (doesn't catch second)
75 84 081 85 79 80 86 THIRD now is pushed down to fourth


You are falling into a trap. Yes, sure, if you get one point more than the guy you think is going to be third, you beat HIM
but you need to think, not in terms of beating that illusory "third" but matching the KNOWN second

Put it another way


The current third team is Birmingham and we are two points ahead of them

We lose a game, they draw and now we are one point ahead of them, so we are "safe" right?

WRONG! That's presuming no other club can catch Birmingham and beat them by two points, us by one

You KNOW what has been good enough (the points for second)

You know what has failed (the points for third)

It's a classic error of logic to say third+1 would be enough



Would it help if I explained that my third-year project at Uni was

"Errors and Failings in Human Inference"?


See here:

81 88 106 94 94 98 99 FIRST
79 86 090 87 86 92 89 SECOND

=======================
75 84 081 85 79 80 86 THIRD

Take the first group

81 First
79 Second
75 Third
74
74
73


You think you could drop 3 points. right?

81 First
76 Second (dropped three points)
75 Third
77 WON 3 points OOPS now you have been overtaken
74
73


You all seem not to grasp that if you achieve LESS points, some of the clubs in 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th may well have got MORE

That's why you don't focus on third, but on second, what you KNOW gets you up.

[CMRoyal]

Give me strength.

[CMRoyal]

Would it help if I explained that my third-year project at Uni was

"Errors and Failings in Human Inference"?

Maybe you should have done one in comprehension.

[Platypuss]

And guess what, you are third because second got MORE than one point more than third!

I'd stick to the stats; common sense isn't your strong suit.

[Snowball]

I'm right

[Platypuss]

Would it help if I explained that my third-year project at Uni was

"Errors and Failings in Human Inference"?

Good luck in the retake.

Snip more extraneous drivel

You are falling into a trap. Yes, sure, if you get one point more than the guy you think is going to be third, you beat HIM
but you need to think, not in terms of beating that illusory "third" but matching the KNOWN second.

In this exercise, you ARE the known second.

Now use your brain.

[S09Royal]

I'm bored.

I'm right

Give me strength

We'll be promoted in April.

[Snowball]

The Proof

In the season we went up we got 106 points. No probs. IGNORE US and deal with clubs 2-3-4-5

Sheffield United were second with 90 points. We know that.

I'm saying you have to be looking toward that total (87) because that's the average for SECOND

2nd Place was 90 Sheffield
3rd Place was 81 Watford
4th Place was 80 Preston
5th Place was 79 Leeds

OK you lot say, that means Sheffield "only needed" 82.

For Sheffield to have 82 points they must lose eight points.

Meaning in your fictional season

(a) they "drew" 4 games in your fictional season that they actually won in the real season
or
(b)they "lost" 8 games in your fictional season that they actually drew in the real season

in the case of (a) the chasing teams have an extra 8 points to share out!!
in the case of (b) the chasing teams have an extra SIXTEEN points to share out

The point is that when a side gets 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92 THEY KILL OTHER SIDES WHO LOSE POINTS.

In their 90-point season Sheffield WON 9 points against Watford-Preston-Leeds
BUT THEY TOOK 12 POINTS OFF THESE CLUBS in doing so!

3 Points gained WL In that season Sheffield beat Watford (took 3 points OFF Watford) (Watford got 3 from 6)
4 Points gained WD in that season they beat Preston and drew with them (that is they took five points OFF Preston) (Preston got 1 from 6)
2 Points gained DD In that season they drew twice with Leeds (that is they took four points off Leeds) (Leeds only got 2 from 6)

If you reduce Sheffield to 82 then IF the clubs in 3rd, 4th, 5th benefit (most likely)

So to lose 8 and drop to 82 (your scenario)

-2 Let Leeds win both the games they drew (+4 points and +2 GD)
-3 Let Watford win 3-2 the game they lost 2-3 (+3 points and +2 GD
-2 Let Preston win the game they drew 1-1 (+2 points and +1 GD

There's your dropped 8 points... trouble is the chasing pack have GAINED points

ACTUAL TABLE

90 GD 30 Sheffield
81 GD 24 Watford
80 GD 29 Preston
78 GD 19 Leeds

This changes the table to:

84 GD 26 Watford 2ND
82 GD 30 Preston 3RD
82 GD 25 Sheffield THEY ARE NOW FOURTH!!!
82 GD 21 Leeds

The mistake you are all making is forgetting that if you reduce the points
gained by the second club YOU GIVE THEM TO OTHER CLUBS

THE "THIRD PLACE +1" scenario only works if the points you give away are to mid-table or relegation clubs

[Snowball]

Difficult Question

If 84 and 85 and 86 have failed to make second spot, what points total should you aim for as a minimum?

Easy Answer 87




84 and 85 and 86 have each failed to make second spot in the last 7 seasons

[Royal Lady]

Look Snowball , it's all conjecture really isn't it. No-one knows where we or other teams will finish. There's no secret formula to winning or coming second or third for that matter. Other than winning games of course. I'm losing the will to live every time I see you've posted MORE stats. Chill out.

[Snowball]

I AM chilled out.

It's not MY fault you are all wrong and I'm right on this.

Steve and I were talking on the phone and he agrees, "87 min"