SaintBobby

This analysis is from my father (a mathematician), for what it's worth....I asked him if the rational thing to do was to bet against Saints being promoted given the current odds (we're 2/7 or 1/4 TO GO UP) "I have now completed a detailed statistical analysis of League 1, and my conclusion is that the odds currently being offered are the right ones. I see a reasonable target for Southampton's last ten games as 20 points. This is what you have managed to achieve this season if the first six matches (4 points from 6 games) are discounted. Looking at the remaining fixtures, six wins, two draws, and two defeats seems entirely achievable. If you make this total you are almost certain to finish second. Only four teams could possibly beat you. If we make the entirely reasonable assumption that you keep your superior goal difference, 1. Bournemouth would need 24 points from 8 games (ie to win them all), or 2. Milton Keynes would need 21 points from 7 games (ie to win them all), or 3. Peterborough would need 20 points from 8 games - this means winning at least 7 games, or winning six and losing none (and they still have away games away against three of the top eight teams - Huddersfield, Leyton Orient and Rochdale - as well as a home game against Bournemouth), or 4. Huddersfield would need 16 points from 7 games - this means winning at least five games, and losing not more than one (and they still have to play Peterborough at home, and Milton Keynes and Brighton away). So I expect that even if you got 18 or 19 points from the last 10 games you would still stand a reasonable chance of finishing second. So my assessment of the probabilities of finishing second are Southampton 65% Huddersfield 20% Peterborough 10% Milton Keynes 5% Bournemouth 0% If you don't finish second you are certain to be in the play offs, and I would think your chances are at least 1 in 3 of winning these if you go that route. So Southampton's probability of promotion, based on the situation as of today is 0.65 + 0.35 x 0.33 = 0.77 which equates exactly to odds of 2/7. So I see no reason to lay off your bets. I do see Saturday's game against Milton Keynes as a critical one in affecting these calculations. If Milton Keynes lose they will stand virtually no chance of finishing second, and Southampton's odds of promotion will certainly shorten. If you lose, the challenge of 18+ points from 9 games would be tougher. If you draw, you are (just about) on track. Do you agree with my logic?"

I think he will probably be fired if we don't get promoted. And he probably should be fired. His points per game total is okay, but not great. With our resources, we should be getting more points per game than most other (all?) teams in all divisions. I think we're about 80% to go up though, so it's a moot point. Btw, I don't totally dismiss the idea that he might get us promoted and still be fired. This would be seriously harsh. But if, for (exaggerated) example, the next stage of the plan is to spend £20m on new players then one might conclude Adkins isn't the man to do it. By way of analogy, I can well believe that the manager who is the right man to get us promoted from the Championship might not be the right man for Saints in the Premiership. I think the difference between the Championship and League One is less stark, but they are still very real

I reckon we're better than 1.67 points a game, so I'd take the games in hand. Of course, the closer we get to the end of the season, the more you might want to bank points. For example, if you asked me now if I'd take 1 point Plymouth away, I'd say no. But if by the time we've played 44 games, we only need 2 points to guarantee promotion then I'd say yes. Although, conversely, we might need to be to get 6 points from the last two games to stand any chance of automatic promotion...it's all very confusing... Nevertheless, I'd say we need 20 points from where we are now. We have 10 games left. So, you shouldn't "sell" a game in hand for anything less than 2 points.

No we don't. We need to end the season one point clear of Pboro, or maybe level, in all likelihood. So if we go five points clear, that means we can probably afford to screw up later in the season. I do get bored with everyone always seeming to say that every game is a "must win". It's like that absurd thread saying we may have to win all our remaining games to get promoted. It's total rubbish.

6 points would be okay. Any more would be great. 5 would not be a disaster, but would leave us with lots to do.

Pretty poor. Showing no width at all.

I'm still not sure the point you're trying to prove. You think a league in which everyone wins 50% and loses 50% of their matches is more competitive than a league in which everyone draws 100% of their matches? The former would mean "more teams are winning, up and down the league", but so what? It doesn't prove the league is harder.

Yes, that is pretty much exactly what I'm saying. Because the division is weaker this year, you may need 95 points to win it, 90 to come 2nd and 85 to make the play offs and 55 points to stay up (these are just guesses) To flip my Barca-Man U example slightly - if the worst 3 teams in the division were (doomed to relegation) amateur pub teams - they would all end up with about ten points each. Every other team in the division would expect to cane them. So you might then need 55+ points to stay up. Other than the fact that draws diminish the total number of points, it's basically a "zero-sum" game. For example, a 24 team division that finished as follows: 1. 138 points 2. 132 points 3. 126 points 4. 120 points 5. 114 points 6. 108 points .... ... 20. 60 points 21. 18 points 22. 12 points 23. 6 points 24. 0 points would not strike me as obviously being a competitive league. In fact, it would just be basically a series of mismatches. Yet, by your criteria this would be the toughest, hardest league known to man.

Mathematically then, all you are measuring is the number of draws. Draws diminish the total number of points distributed amongst the 24 teams. For example, it's technically possible to win the league with just 46 points and a high number of goals scored. I'd say this is actually a fair way to measure a tough division...alongside narrow wins (if there are lots of wins by 3, 4 or 5 goals by the same sort of teams...the division isn't that competitive). It can't be simultaneously: 1. harder to win the division 2. harder to get automatic promotion 3. harder to get into the play-offs 4. harder to win the play-offs 5. harder to avoid relegation unless there has been some incredible injection of talent that has passed your team by. My only argument really is that "points needed" (for anything) is not a measurement that's worth using if you're trying to measure how tough the league is. My Barca-Man Utd example is the extreme end of this. But you could also have a harder relegation battle with a lower points threshold to stay up. Assuming the number of draws is about constant, the points totals aren't a measurement of difficulty, they may even be a measure of ease.

Ok...even then the points stands. The top six can - on average - be better. But the overall division weaker. In fact, I'd argue that the points total required for automatic promotion going up shows the strength of the division is probably going down. (in my loopy Barca & Man Utd example, you'd need about 130 points for automatic promotion precisely because the division was so weak....a weak division means the relatively strong teams find it easier to notch up points.....)

It does make sense. If for some bizarre reason, Barcelona and Man Utd joined League One next season, but the other 22 clubs were all literally pub teams, the division would - overall - be weaker. But it would also be harder to gain automatic promotion. Hope this helps.

This. Not spending money is a gamble too.....and one Saints have taken this year.....

About on a par. A little bit easier to win the division. Much harder to make the play-offs (because there are 4 or 5 good teams, not 2 or 3) A bit easier to avoid relegation

I'm sorry...it's madness..yes, I want us to win all 12 games. If we do, well probably pip Brighton to the title. I think Posh and Udders play each other....so we just don't need 36 points... 25ish will probably do it. 30 definitely....

Grrrr...disappointing night....at least hoped Huddersfield would drop points....

We do not need 36 points from our remaining 12 games. We just don't.

Jesus Christ guys...70% of the season has gone and we're fourth...FOURTH....in the third division and arguing about whether our style of football should be prose or poetry. If we were fifteen points clear and experimenting with different formations, fair enough. We ain't. So, at the moment, I favour any system of play that gets us promoted. IMHO, that isn't "hoof it up to Rickie", but neither is it attempting back heels in your own penalty area (ask Cesc Fabregas). Basic strategy should be to release the ball down the flanks (to Chamberlain and Lallana, our two most dangerous players), try to beat one man (or draw a free kick) and then cross it in for Barnard or Lambert. Anything else is a bit of a luxury at this point.... Plan A will still probably get us promoted.

For me, promotion was the minimum expectation this season. Winning the division was a realistic expectation. Simply qualifying for the play-offs (and then losing) would be a huge under-achievement. I don't believe Saints have a "right to be promoted" but we were the shortest odds of any team in any division to win our league/be promoted. I expected us to be promoted (and still do...just expected it to be easier). Failing to go up for Saints would be the equivalent of Chelsea failing to qualify for the Champions League or Liverpool finishing in the bottom half of the Premier Division or Aston Villa being relegated from the top flight...i.e. a pretty woeful under-performance.

I think it would be a pretty reasonable achievement - not a very good one. To my mind, we underperformed appallingly this season pre-Adkins but have also probably underperformed just a tad since his arrival as well. For me, the low points have been losing at home to Plymouth, Brentford and Rochdale. That should have been 9 points (or maybe 7), rather than zero. I hate losing any game, but accept that you can't have anything like a 100% record away from home. Over the course of a season, losing to the odd Tranmere or Walsall - or getting pegged back by an excellent Peterborough side - will happen. Actually, our away form is about the best in the division. But our home form only is only 6th (on a points per game basis). If we don't go up, it will probably be because we didn't win a home league game until October (we also got whacked 0-3 by Swindon at SMS in the JPT early on, of course) So, Nigel Adkins definitely started with a handicap - but it's one I hoped and expected him to overcome more easily. I'm still confident of 2nd. And I'd probably make us favourites if we have to settle for the play-offs - although one bad bounce can stuff you in the play-off lottery, of course. Promotion will be mission accomplished. But it all could and should have been so much easier... One Faustian pact that keeps running through my mind is whether I'd prefer to seal 2nd or have a guarantee of winning the play-offs. Obviously the latter. But what about 2nd or a 90% chance of winning the play-offs? Or 80% or so on? Having said all that, we'll now probably win 12 games in a row and win the title with 97 points....(I don't wholly rule this out, btw)

Hmmm....you may want to edit this post....

Everyone seems to be chugging along at 6 or 7 out of 10, it seems to me. Exception has been Hammond in recent weeks, he's really impressed me.

pretty clear pen, I'd say. But Kelvin would have saved it, so makes no difference...

I think the problem on this forum is that attitudes seem to polarise into those who seem to think things are really grim and those who think they are really great. The truth is somewhere in the middle. I'd say our performance this season is mildly disappointing, but I can understand the argument that it's been just about satisfactory. Things have picked up after (another) dismal start, but we've never really hit a totally blistering run of form (apart from a short run over Xmas/New Year). I'd also say in recent matches, we've been a tad lucky - i.e. our results have been better than our performances. Walsall is the exception that proves this rule. I'm not a wrist slitter, just remain a bit underwhelmed by our season so far. I'm very confident we will be promoted, but was hoping we'd achieve it with comfort.

About 100 points should have been our target at the start of the season. We have the best - and certainly most expensive - squad by far. Finding one chunk of the season where we're averaging a bit over 2 points is good, but not amazing. Over the last three games, we've won 9 points. That "equates" to 138 points in a season... But over the whole season so far, we've been whipped by Brighton FFS. I'll settle for 2nd and think we'll get it, but that won't be an amazing achievement, it'll be a little bit below expectations to be honest.

33 points from 15 games is pretty good. But not jaw-droppingly amazing.