SaintBobby

My guess? About 5.

I have no idea what you’re screaming about. The post at the top of this thread only assumes points from wins. This has been pointed out to you endless times and it is there in black and white in the original post. You might notice this by him using the term “chance of winning”. If the chance of Saints winning in each of our remaining games is 50%, we are going to get more than 1.5 points per game over the season. Because we will draw some. The original post gives that guy’s prediction of the number of points will we likely get from winning matches. He forgot to include predicted points from drawing matches. So, the total will be higher. I appreciate that you consider the chance of drawing “isn’t a f***ing thing”. But it is. And, in the real world, you add together the points you get from wins and draws. So, unless you believe that the chance of drawing “isn’t a f***ing thing”, then in the real world of predictions you should add together the points you might reasonably expect from wins to those you might expect from draws. This will give you a higher number and explains why the OP came up short - even on his own numbers. He only calculated likely returns from wins. He didn’t factor in draws. There are likely to be some draws. You add these expected value from draws - worth 1 point each - to the expected value from wins (worth 3 points each) to get your estimated final total. So, once again, to put it plainly…if you think our “chances of winning” at Brentford away are 50%, which the OP does, the expected value of that match isn’t just 1.5 points…you have to add on to that expected value the chance of drawing. So, probably, say, another 0.2 points or so. To help you finally grasp this…if, instead of playing a match, a die was rolled at the start of the game, with a 1 or 2 meaning “lose”, a 3 or 4 meaning “draw” and a 5 or 6 meaning “win”, you have a 67% chance of getting some points and an expected rate of return of 1.33 points. If you only consider the “chances of winning”, as our original poster did, you’ll put the “chances of winning” at 33% and the expected points at just 1. But that’s wrong. There’s also a chance of drawing and that boasts it to 1.33. This oversight explains why the OP wrongly (on his own numbers) says he expects us to get fewer points per game in the remaining matches than in those already played. This is simply because he forgot to factor in the points we might reasonably expect to get from draws. And, whether you like it or not, draws are a thing.

Yep. You’ve got it. Despite CB Fry’s bizarre assertion that the chance of drawing “isn’t a f***ing thing”, actually it is. (As those of us on Saturday witnessed!) So, for each match, you could work out our chance of winning it. Multiply that by 3 points. But additionally, we have a chance of drawing it - bolt that on and just work it out as a proportion of 1 point. If every time we play Man City we have a 10% chance of winning that’s worth 0.3 points. If we also have a 20% chance of drawing that’s another 0.2 points. So, at the outset we are expecting to get 0.5 points (obviously, you actually get 3, 1 or 0…but it all averages out in the long run). The original post had the bare bones of a good approach to calculate how many more points we will get this season. But only included points we might expect from winning games. So far, 40% of our points have come from draws. And, despite CB Fry’s claim that this “isn’t a f***ing thing”, it’s pretty likely that we will pick up some more draws in our remaining games. If the original poster had remembered to plug this in, he’d probably have ended up concluding that we will finish the season on about 46 points, not 41 or 42. Because draws count. They are a thing.

😂😂😂😂 Trying to imagine someone attempting a pre match discussion with CB Fry. “What do you think our chances of winning are today, CB?” ”Very good. I’d say over 50%” ”Really, I think we will only get a draw, CB” ”I agree. I also think we’ll draw. That is intrinsic to the model” 😂😂😂

😂😂😂😂 utterly amazing how 10 of our matches have ended in draws if the chance of drawing “isn’t a thing”. What are the odds on that? 😂😂😂😂

Can you read? He isn’t predicting we will take 10% of the points from those tough games. He is predicting we have a 10% “chance of winning” each of them. If you have a really tough run of ten games, where you have a 10% “chance of winning” in each case, how many points would you guess we’d take from those games? (A) 3 points? Or (B) More than 3 points? (I’ll give you a clue. It’s B). So, and this requires some complex division now, if you have a 10% “chance of winning” in a run of just five (rather than ten) tough games what’s the expected points value of those games (to as many decimal places as you like as it’s an expected average value)? Is it: (A) 1.5 points? or (B) more than 1.5 points? (I’ll give you a clue - it’s B). If you can follow this high value, advanced maths, you should be able to work out why the OP has undercalculated our likely points haul from the remaining fixtures. Give it time. It will percolate through soon enough.

😂😂😂😂 omfg you still don’t get it. It’s hilarious. Predicting an expected return of 1.5 points from 5 particular games doesn’t mean 1 or 2 draws. The OP says it - in black and white himself himself - it’s 5 long shots at a win. You’ll probably win 0 or 1 of them. 1.5 is an average guess of how many points wins will deliver you from those games. The clue is kind of there…when he writes the words “chances of winning”. You seem to be “massively over- thinking it”. To most people the phrase “chances of winning” is pretty straightforward. It means the chance you have of winning that game. So, for example, a “chance of winning” of 50% means you have a 50-50 chance of winning that game. Your anticipated points return from actually winning that game is 1.5. It’s not 1.5 because you think you will draw that game one and a half times. To you, for whatever reason, the phrase “chances of winning” is apparently defined as meaning “chances of drawing”. Bizarre. Kind of cute and rather endearing. But truly bizarre. Bless. 😂😂😂

Seriously? I'm loathing all the dubious PL cancellations, but that does seem harsh!

No, you didn’t really understand it. Certainly, you didn’t grasp the big flaw in it. You couldn’t understand that we will accrue points both from wins and also from draws, but that it only showed points likely to come from winning games, so the working method was clearly wrong (or perhaps you just didn’t read it properly!) Apparently, noting that we might pick up some points from draws between now and the end of the season was “massively over thinking” things. 😂😂😂 I’m pleased to have had the opportunity to put you right, though. All part of my commitment to care in the community.

Nah. Not really, hun. Hope it’s helped you work through the basic maths though, sweetie.

Always happy to help those who struggle with multiplication and addition. Doesn’t come easy to some people, so it’s usually best to talk them through step by step.

Hope this helps the mathematically hard of thinking.

Bless. But it’s impossible to “understand” at “first glance” and, sadly, you now seem to have failed to understand it again. So sad to witness this regression. I’ll amend the original post, maybe that way you’ll find it easier to grasp. It’s really not as difficult as you’re making it out to be.

It’s certainly been amazingly quiet. I guess I might happily settle for simply holding on to what we have. The keeper situation isn’t ideal, but can wait for the summer. The depth of the squad is pretty damned good at the moment. Certainly not easy to see an area we could improve without spending mega bucks.

So…we will likely get more than 17.7 points. Because we will win some games and draw some others. Glad it’s falling into place for you. You were massively over-thinking it, but bit by painful bit you got there in the end. Well done you 👍👍👍

It’s pretty simple isn’t it? You have a chance to win games and a chance to draw too. You’re massively over-thinking this.

Well, I’m not quite sure how pointing out how his “chance of winning” doesn’t lead to the predicted points outcome he suggests is “massively over-thinking it”. It’s hardly quantum physics is it?…it’s not even up the rigours of GCSE maths….

Well, I don't think there's much to think. If the "chance of winning" (which is what it says) is as he says, the likely points haul is higher. You might think his "points prediction" is right...or his "chances of winning" predictions for the matches. But one thing is for sure, they can't both be right. Overall, you'd probably also expect us to take a higher % of points from the remaining games than the previous ones, FWIW. (given we've played City, West Ham and Wolves twice and these would probably be lower than average on predicted points haul). If the OP had said "we'll probably get 18 or so points from the remaining matches as a hunch", well he's probably not a million miles off. But he's actually put forward a mathematical method of getting there which doesn't add up.

If the calculation is that we have a 50% of winning a given match (say, Brentford away), then the expected points from that game is higher than 1.5. You have a 50% chance of 3 points (=1.5) and, on top of that, some chance of 1 point (maybe 25%, so +0.25? for a total of 1.75) If we have a 10% chance of winning each of those 5 listed tough games, you would expect to get more than 1.5 points from them in total (ignoring, of course, that we have already take a point from one of those matches yesterday). I don't know if the "chances of winning" precentages that he lists are right. But if they are right, we should expect to get more than the 17.7 points he calculates from those matches (again, ignoring that we've already taken 1 from Man City).

Well, from what I can see, the expected points are based on multiplying "chance of wining" by 3 points per match. So, he reckons we have a 10% chance of winning in those 5 most dfficult matches and so multiples the 15 points available by 0.1 and comes up with 1.5. Presumably giving a zero chance of drawing any of them, which is weird. You're right that it's impossible to get 17 points just from wins, of course - but that doesn't really matter mathematically. Although from each match you can only collect 3, 1 or zero points, you could put the expected value of a match at something weird like 1.856 points. You're not actually going to get 1.856 points, it just indicates where you are on the spectrum from 0-3. In that scenario, a draw is a bit of a disapppointment, a win pretty good and a defeat a serious disapppointment. Against City yesterday, if we were reckoned to be 10% to win and 20% to draw, that comes out as an expected 0.5 points - so a draw would have exceeded expectations. What the OP's model does is to only consider the points you can anticipate geting from winning. It's fair to say he expects us to get c17 points from winning games (although, obviously the actual number would be to get 15 or 18 or whatever) but, weirdly, no points from draws. Most betting/predicting models at the start of the season will spit something out like "Saints expected points total is 42.76". They don't actually think we will get that weird 0.76 - it's just a number that gives you the predicted best chance of getting as close to the final tally as you can (even though it's certain you'll be wrong by at least 0.24 points).

The odd thing about this "methodology" is that the "chance of winning" and "estimated points" don't correlate. My understanding is that, in the Premier League, you get one point for drawing a match. The calculation on this thread assumes no draws (or no points for drawing). If you have a 50% chance of winning a given game, your estimated points return is higher than 1.5. You presumably have some sort of chance (25%?) of drawing it, which needs to be added. (in this case, it would mean your est, points is 1.75). If you have a 10% chance of winning a match, you also presumable have some chance of drawing it. (15%?). In this case your est. points goes from 0.3 to 0.45. This pretty glaring flaw explains why the original poster only expects us to get 1.04 points per game - he has ruled out Saints getting any further points at all from draws.

They pretty much deserve everything they get. I do think clubs should be able to re-form under the same name, but Derby have cheated. They should rebuild again from the Beazer Homes Third Division if necessary.

Palace now winning. Without Zaha.

Sounds about right and unaffordable. I wonder if we could do a Tino-style deal? Buy him for, say, £10m and they can buy him back for £25m in 2-3 years time if they wish to?

Ignore that...normal service resumed....