SaintBobby

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....

wtf is happening at Tottenham?!

Delighted with the grit and determination in the last three matches - a year or two ago we would have lost all three. Seems we have discovered a bit of mental resilience.

The match is available on BBC iPlayer, even if you're not in Wales.

Isn’t the problem that our attacking midfielders are, by and large, wingers? Don’t really have anyone who is a natural in that central attacking position - possibly S Armstrong, but we also seem to play him on the flanks.

I guess, at the moment, I’m more relieved than excited, but this does seem like a step forward even if it’s not a quantum leap. I see our odds for relegation have also drifted out to about 17/1 or even 19/1 with some bookmakers, suggesting punters think this improves our position too.

I think we’ll stay up with about 15 points to spare. The truth this season and last is that mediocrity is enough to stay up with comfort - assuming you don’t have a run of truly abysmal luck/results.

A bit like last season, the bottom three could end up with a derisory points total. I think it could be as few as 28 points to stay up....think it was that last season?

Yeah, but as you say, it's the law that is the problem here, not the game. Because the state have treated Covid-Omicron differently to any other affliction, it's legally barring players from competing. In all other circumstances, players carry on with a "very slight knock" or a "bit of the sniffles". That's illegal with regard to this current minor affliction.