Not at their best consistently I agree but they still give us a much better chance of winning football games in the PL and EL.
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Player Micky van de Ven
- Thread starter The Fighting Cock
- Start date
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Not at their best consistently I agree but they still give us a much better chance of winning football games in the PL and EL.
Bookies have us at 5/1 which is 17%? so maybe 30% is a touch on the optimistic side tbf
When he comes back it will be like last time. He’ll just be in the side.
How we are treating these injured players is weird. However, we are bringing in new medical staff. It takes a while for them to get to know the players, what works for their recovery and what doesn’t.
How we are treating these injured players is weird. However, we are bringing in new medical staff. It takes a while for them to get to know the players, what works for their recovery and what doesn’t.
Yeah 5/1 is 17%, but bookies always overplay the likelihood to minimise losses, i.e. it's likely closer to 10% in pure statistical terms.Bookies have us at 5/1 which is 17%? so maybe 30% is a touch on the optimistic side tbf
VDV and Vicario will probably make a difference, I dunno about the rest though.
Don't even know how you create a % for something like that tho
There isn't a single method. People like Opta run models on all the possible outcomes, thousands of times, and generate probabilities. That's probably the most robust way.
But as a Spurs fan I can confirm the real chance is 0%!
Lol
You really are wrong far more than you realise
Yeah, sorry, you’re right all along. Ange js great. It’s all down to bad luck. He’s the best available coach for us
Why do you think I'm saying anything about Ange at all?
I remember reading a book called the numbers game which disproved this showing that it's just a reversion to the mean. Managers get sacked when form is worst and then there is usually an uptick in results which they argued would have happened anyway. Could be bollocks though!
Same thing shown here Redirect Notice
Ah. The plot thickens !
Nah There is solid evidence that bottom half PL teams have a bounce. But of course not all do. Everton are it seems. Better team than us now
We potentially have a lot to gain from a bounce. Esp if one believes the injuries are in part due to Ange
schrodinger's VDV
Not true. If you look on an exchange like Betfair, where you can see the prices for both 'back' and 'lay' (with the difference effectively being the 'margins' for each gambler), then you'll get a better idea. At present:
Back: 6.2 (16.1%)
Lay: 7.0 (14.3%)
They will tend to get closer as the event nears its completion and people are betting more, but looking at those two numbers, it seems reasonable to say that the market believes there is around 15% chance of us winning the EL - not the 17% Rich was suggesting, but far nearer to that than the "10% in pure statistical terms" that you are suggesting.
Richard Arlison
if you ever want to see implied % odds, just Google "Implied odds" or "Implied probability calculator" etc and it will convert any type of betting syntax into any other of your choosing. I doubt it is bollocks, as it totally makes sense statistically / logically - teams most often sack their managers when they have just been through a terrible run of results, so the next few results after terrible run of results (whether you sack the manager or not) is statistically likely to be better. Which is exactly what you've just said.
So for me it's not bollocks at all, it makes perfect sense. With respect to all concerned, responses above like "There is solid evidence that bottom half PL teams have a bounce" simply suggest that the poster does not understand what the analysis is saying, i.e. they are confusing a 'bounce' or 'improved results caused by manager change' with simple 'reversion to the mean'.
I'd say on an even more basic level the "bounce" makes perfect sense because, assuming you have a bit of faith in the people running the club, they are getting rid of someone unfit for the role, and replacing them with someone better.I doubt it is bollocks, as it totally makes sense statistically / logically - teams most often sack their managers when they have just been through a terrible run of results, so the next few results after terrible run of results (whether you sack the manager or not) is statistically likely to be better. Which is exactly what you've just said.
With respect to all concerned, responses above like "There is solid evidence that bottom half PL teams have a bounce" simply suggest that the poster does not understand what the analysis is saying, i.e. they are confusing a 'bounce' or 'improved results caused by manager change' with simple 'reversion to the mean'.
Nobody is sacking a manager because they think they're great, and likewise nobody is bringing in a new guy that they don't think is better.
Of course results should be better once the change is made.
I doubt it is bollocks, as it totally makes sense statistically / logically - teams most often sack their managers when they have just been through a terrible run of results, so the next few results after terrible run of results (whether you sack the manager or not) is statistically likely to be better. Which is exactly what you've just said.
With respect to all concerned, responses above like "There is solid evidence that bottom half PL teams have a bounce" simply suggest that the poster does not understand what the analysis is saying, i.e. they are confusing a 'bounce' or 'improved results caused by manager change' with simple 'reversion to the mean'.
It's likely very similar to the hot hand phenomenon in Basketball.
The psychological perception of a hot hand is very different from the statistical reality of a hot hand.
Sameway, you don't leave a guy open when they are hot because of the psychological implications of the last few shots he made, you also don't want to play a team just after they appointed a new manager.
Bask to the original conversation tho, psychologically and statistically, getting your best players fit is much more likely to win us the EL than any new manager bounce.
Yes all of that could be true, but it is ignoring the statistical explanation posted earlier which could equally be the cause of the better results. Getting better results because you changed the manager could be true in some cases, but equally it could be the simple reversion to the mean that causes better results in the cases of what many people assume (therefore sometimes incorrectly) to be a 'new manager bounce'. I'm not saying that a new manager can't have an effect, of course no one would say that, I'm just saying that when people say things like "There is solid evidence that bottom half PL teams have a bounce" this is grossly misleading as it is ignoring (or more likely not understanding) statistical analysis such as that posted earlier, and hence should be taken with a large pinch of salt (well, by anyone educated anyway).
Sorry everyone for going so far off track from the VDV conversation (I didn't start that btw
) - with regard to VDV, surely questions will be asked in tomorrow press conference, and surely Ange will have to say something more definitive, or at least with more substance, than has been the case so far...