Posts: 379
Threads: 11
Reputation:
2605
Joined: Jul 2015
Location: The dude abides in Cbus
Mood: None
(02-11-2022, 03:17 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: That isn't how that works. Just because a model says "XYZ team has 20% chance of winning" and then that team wins doesn't mean that it doesn't matter. It could just mean that the team hit on their 20%. I am not familiar with 538's model, so I have no idea how good it is. However, LA is a better team than Cincinnati. It isn't a crazy difference, but they are better and the Bengals being underdogs again is of no surprise. They definitely don't have a 50% chance of victory, though.
Using the Vegas spread, Cincinnati has a 33% chance of victory. Just because it is unlikely doesn't mean that it is impossible. I'm sure if you played this game 100 times, the Rams would win the majority. Cincinnati only needs to win once, though, and they can.
Im only a wrong if I say "100 percent"....and I never keep it 100....said every analytics guy ever.
Based on shit from the past, this happens this many times so then blah yada blah.....and of course everything will continue to happen at that rate if you base what you do off our algorithms based on when no one did any of that....it makes perfect sense and if it don't work we were still right cuz were only wrong 64 percent of the time its cloudy with a chance of meatballs.
Being a Bengals fan is like being in love with a narcissist. It's a brutal, emotionally abusive relationship but I never leave and just keep making excuses for them.
Posts: 4,962
Threads: 55
Reputation:
36413
Joined: Mar 2018
Location: Oklahoma
Mood: None
(02-12-2022, 07:02 AM)Savagehenry54 Wrote: Im only a wrong if I say "100 percent"....and I never keep it 100....said every analytics guy ever.
Based on shit from the past, this happens this many times so then blah yada blah.....and of course everything will continue to happen at that rate if you base what you do off our algorithms based on when no one did any of that....it makes perfect sense and if it don't work we were still right cuz were only wrong 64 percent of the time its cloudy with a chance of meatballs.
You have a strong grasp of this topic.
Posts: 2,898
Threads: 91
Reputation:
15282
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
Considering the bengals had less than 5% chance of winning the chiefs game in the second quarter… I’ll take this with a grain of salt.
Posts: 5,446
Threads: 132
Reputation:
25670
Joined: Dec 2021
Mood: None
(02-11-2022, 07:38 PM)JaggedJimmyJay Wrote: Dunno why. Talent was all over the roster, and Joe Burrow exists.
I sure as hell didn't expect a Super Bowl though.
The roster was definitely not great at the first of the season. Several of the free agents flourished. B J Hill, Tre Flowers, and others joining would never have been expected to contribute like they have. Other contributors Marcus Bailey. Vegas picked this team to win 6 games. This team hit a higher level after the bye week. Then they hit another after beating KC the first time. Their confidence continued to climb. The coaching staff really made this whole team focused and ready despite injuries. The backups did excellent.
Posts: 14,216
Threads: 293
Reputation:
31201
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
You know how chances of rain work? Say channel 5 or whoever go on air and say there's a 10% chance of rain.. That means that 10% of their viewing area have a chance of rain. it says nothing about what those chances are, just that segment can expect a chance of rain.. In reality the entire area could then consider themselves to have a chance of rain even with not a single cloud within 500 miles in any direction.. LOL
In the immortal words of my old man, "Wait'll you get to be my age!"
Chicago sounds rough to the maker of verse, but the one comfort we have is Cincinnati sounds worse. ~Oliver Wendal Holmes Sr.
Posts: 355
Threads: 8
Joined: Oct 2015
Mood: None
(02-12-2022, 01:25 AM)Science Friction Wrote: No, actually it's not. They use mathematical modeling. We can disagree with their models but they aren't just made up out of nowhere. Not everything is fake news.
Lol it's called propaganda. It's pointless jibberish.
Its a lie. But it's also an actual hint.
They don't literally have that percentage chance.
The number itself either already means a win or loss, depending on the numerology of the team and day.
Notice the best Jocks wore 32.
Posts: 5,389
Threads: 52
Reputation:
16261
Joined: May 2015
Location: Blue Ash
Mood: None
(02-11-2022, 05:00 PM)casear2727 Wrote: Great points. How do these algorithms account for variables such as injuries, home or away, weather.
Also does it count the final game vs the Browns when our starters didn't play?
does it account for trends as well? Teams don't always play the same in the first/second half of the season. Some get much better, others fall apart. The amount of variables is insane, minor/major injuries even game time decisions.
All i know is, our Defense is being majorly overlooked vs their Offense.
I think it's gonna be a slugfest and will come down to the usual, which team turns it over the least... i like our odds there.
Posts: 51
Threads: 0
Reputation:
119
Joined: Jan 2022
Mood: None
If a Nick Foles led Eagles team beat Tom Brady Patriots anything is possible in the Super Bowl.
Posts: 5,389
Threads: 52
Reputation:
16261
Joined: May 2015
Location: Blue Ash
Mood: None
(02-11-2022, 05:44 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Sorry, but that is not how it works.
If you were to race 100 meters against Usain Bolt you would not have a 50% chance of beating him.
One vs one? Bolt's only resistance is air, try predicting how if he was one of 11 players vs 11 others who's job IS to stop you do.
On a team sport like that, Bolt's advantage can be minimized or even negated. For example, his x4 relay teams didn't win every single time.
Posts: 5,389
Threads: 52
Reputation:
16261
Joined: May 2015
Location: Blue Ash
Mood: None
(02-11-2022, 06:13 PM)Science Friction Wrote: Does anyone know what our win probability was when we were down 21-3 at Arrowhead? As crazy as it sounds, I think , going into halftime, our players still fully expected to win the game.
I think the Chiefs tapped out at 94.8% win probability at some point during the game.
Posts: 1,502
Threads: 82
Reputation:
5211
Joined: Dec 2021
Mood: None
(02-13-2022, 01:46 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I think the Chiefs tapped out at 94.8% win probability at some point during the game.
Wow. If so, they were nearly 19:1 underdogs at that point.
Posts: 1,502
Threads: 82
Reputation:
5211
Joined: Dec 2021
Mood: None
(02-13-2022, 12:53 AM)IsaacCurtis Wrote: Lol it's called propaganda. It's pointless jibberish.
Its a lie. But it's also an actual hint.
They don't literally have that percentage chance.
The number itself either already means a win or loss, depending on the numerology of the team and day.
Notice the best Jocks wore 32.
You are other worldly, Uncle Ike. Translate that for us mere humans.
Posts: 20
Threads: 0
Reputation:
61
Joined: Mar 2020
Mood: None
Wether its 32% chance or even 2% chance, if it's with Burrow I like those chances.
Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
Posts: 15,366
Threads: 156
Reputation:
20061
Joined: May 2015
Mood:
So you're saying there's a chance
Posts: 1,502
Threads: 82
Reputation:
5211
Joined: Dec 2021
Mood: None
(02-13-2022, 04:01 AM)Danger Zone Wrote: Wether its 32% chance or even 2% chance, if it's with Burrow I like those chances.
Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
That's why I say the 32% is way too low. We have some intangibles in our favor, I believe. I think this is closer to a 50/50 proposition.
|
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
