Certified Legendary Thread Race for the flag, in squiggly lines

[roos_fanatic08]

wicked analysis, love your work.

 

[base615]

I reckon it will end up being a penis

A pretty ****ing weird looking penis I would think

 

[samFFC]

Ladder predictor - whoa

3

Hawthorn1660143.4
4

Fremantle1660137.1
5

North Melbourne1660131.1
6

Collingwood1660125.6
7

Geelong1660114.9


And Swans and Port only predicted to win one match more than this bunch. Super super tight.

 

[samFFC]

Also, I think I disagree with tips on WCvGC and AdelvNM. Feel this will be a really important discriminating weekend.

 

[base615]

If that prediction came true I'm assuming it would be in with a shout as the tightest race in the history of the sport

 

[Final Siren]

Also, I think I disagree with tips on WCvGC and AdelvNM. Feel this will be a really important discriminating weekend.

Could be! Although North are so inconsistent, I'm not sure I'd know what to take away from this weekend no matter what happens.

Anyway, I've always said an observant human being will out-tip a computer, and with the squiggle, it's only going on scores and venues; it doesn't know anything else. So it's sensible to use the computer (or the odds, or the expert tips...) when you don't know much about the teams - because they're probably doing a better job of tracking what's going on than you are - but use your own judgement when you reckon you've got a feel for a match.

 

[Final Siren]

If that prediction came true I'm assuming it would be in with a shout as the tightest race in the history of the sport

Yeah, I'm suspicious of it for that reason. At some point I will do a proper study of how accurate this ladder predictor would have been in the past, and use that data to tweak it.

In 1994, there was only 1 game difference between 3rd (North Melbourne) and 9th (Richmond). That was a close year. The year before, the team that finished 1st (West Coast Essendon) only won 1 more game than a team that missed finals (Geelong), although there was a Final 6, and West Coast Essendon drew a game as well, so it was 1st with 13.5 wins down to 7th with 12 wins.

So it does happen, but only rarely.

 

[clogged]

Yeah, I'm suspicious of it for that reason. At some point I will do a proper study of how accurate this ladder predictor would have been in the past, and use that data to tweak it.

In 1994, there was only 1 game difference between 3rd (North Melbourne) and 9th (Richmond). That was a close year. The year before, the team that finished 1st (West Coast) only won 1 more game than a team that missed finals (Geelong), although there was a Final 6, and West Coast drew a game as well, so it was 1st with 13.5 wins down to 7th with 12 wins.

So it does happen, but only rarely.

Didn't Essendon finish first in 1993?

 

[Andre]

North and Port both sitting just outside the premiership strike zone with port needing to improve defensively while north need to improve offensively.

North and Port make for interesting viewing on the Squiggle. Looking at the starting positions of North and Port you can see the Squiggle is more interested in percentage than the win / loss tally. North finished the 2013 minor round 10th yet had the sixth best percentage. Port finished it 7th yet had the 11th best percentage. The Squiggle doesn't take into account well a few bad losses and many narrow wins as better than closer losses, but more of them (Port are still needing to improve though).

Final Siren any chance of an updated 2014 only squiggle covering round 12?

 

[KillaKanga]

I agree with the squiggle. North should be able to account for the Crows by a goal or two. Sitting top 5 for scoring and top 4 for defending and playing a team out of the 8 means we should win.

If North want to finish top 6 it needs to win this game, it's just too damn tight in the top 8 (a reverse Annabelle Chong if you will).

If North play anywhere near their best they should win. If not I'm afraid the Crows could drop a reverse kanga on our top 6 aspirations.

 

[Final Siren]

Didn't Essendon finish first in 1993?

Whoops, yes. Got my tables confused. Corrected post, thank you.

 

[clogged]

North and Port make for interesting viewing on the Squiggle. Looking at the starting positions of North and Port you can see the Squiggle is more interested in percentage than the win / loss tally. North finished the 2013 minor round 10th yet had the sixth best percentage. Port finished it 7th yet had the 11th best percentage. The Squiggle doesn't take into account well a few bad losses and many narrow wins as better than closer losses, but more of them (Port are still needing to improve though).

Final Siren any chance of an updated 2014 only squiggle covering round 12?

I wouldn't say its percentage based. It's based on ability of sides to compete against other good sides. North Melbourne were highly competitive against good sides last year, but wouldn't win. The squiggle is ignorant of wins and losses and looks at ability to contain sides and score against sides.

 

[The Swans Blog]

Your squiggles predictor counts the Win for Swans in round 14 as a loss - eh?

Richmond 70 - 88 Sydney
1

Port Adelaide11 (11.18)20144.7
2

Hawthorn10 (9.61)30147.4
3

Geelong10 (9.63)30108.4
4

Sydney9 (9.48)40138.7

Same happens for Port vs Richmond away round 17.

Might be some issue with the away win logic.

Pretty cool tool all the same!

 

[SuperSub17]

Your squiggles predictor counts the Win for Swans in round 14 as a loss - eh?

Richmond 70 - 88 Sydney
1

Port Adelaide11 (11.18)20144.7
2

Hawthorn10 (9.61)30147.4
3

Geelong10 (9.63)30108.4
4

Sydney9 (9.48)40138.7

Same happens for Port vs Richmond away round 17.

Might be some issue with the away win logic.

Pretty cool tool all the same!

He doesn't tip it game by game, otherwise a team that is a 60% chance of winning all its games will be given a win for each of them. He's assuming that there will be upsets in there somewhere, just we don't know exactly where they will be. So the chances are Sydney will have lost one game by the time they've played Richmond, even though the individual game against the Tigers they should win.

 

[The Swans Blog]

He doesn't tip it game by game, otherwise a team that is a 60% chance of winning all its games will be given a win for each of them. He's assuming that there will be upsets in there somewhere, just we don't know exactly where they will be. So the chances are Sydney will have lost one game by the time they've played Richmond, even though the individual game against the Tigers they should win.

That's not it at all. Have a look at the ladder later on when a port & swans loss doesn't increment the loss column. Its a logic error on away teams only. His wins/losses sort of calculate but if an away team is favourite to win it looks like a ladder miscalculation giving a loss instead of a win. Look at other teams.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

I agree with the squiggle. North should be able to account for the Crows by a goal or two. Sitting top 5 for scoring and top 4 for defending and playing a team out of the 8 means we should win.

Huh? Going just on for/against we are 6th best for defending and 10th best for scoring. Although it must be said we have 7 games to come against the bottom 7 teams.

 

[iluvparis]

Huh? Going just on for/against we are 6th best for defending and 10th best for scoring. Although it must be said we have 7 games to come against the bottom 7 teams.

He is referring to their rankings under the squiggle rankings system.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

He is referring to their rankings under the squiggle rankings system.

Bloody hell, of course. Apologies jlind.

 

[SuperSub17]

That's not it at all. Have a look at the ladder later on when a port & swans loss doesn't increment the loss column. Its a logic error on away teams only. His wins/losses sort of calculate but if an away team is favourite to win it looks like a ladder miscalculation giving a loss instead of a win. Look at other teams.

Because that's the point where their wins drop below 9.5 or 10.5 or whatever it is, so it rounds down to the number instead of up.

 

[samFFC]

Could be! Although North are so inconsistent, I'm not sure I'd know what to take away from this weekend no matter what happens.

Anyway, I've always said an observant human being will out-tip a computer, and with the squiggle, it's only going on scores and venues; it doesn't know anything else. So it's sensible to use the computer (or the odds, or the expert tips...) when you don't know much about the teams - because they're probably doing a better job of tracking what's going on than you are - but use your own judgement when you reckon you've got a feel for a match.

Absolutely - I think the squiggle is an extremely useful and talented resource. Thanks as always for compiling.

 

[KillaKanga]

He is referring to their rankings under the squiggle rankings system.

Bloody hell, of course. Apologies jlind.

Exactly. I have more faith in where the squiggle places offence and defence (although not totally infallible) because it takes into account who you have played. North haven't played Melbourne, GWS, Saints (bottom 3 teams) yet or Carlton and another Brisbane and Bulldogs game. That's 7 games to come from bottom 7 teams to come. Yet we only have 2 games (Hawks, Geelong) against really strong teams to come.

 

[philohk]

Speaking of tight seasons, I’ve posted on BF before about 1963. The Hawks and Cats finished first and second. They played twice during the H&A, the first time being a draw and the second (in the last round) a Cats win. Of course, the Cats went on to win the flag, but if they’d lost either of those two games they wouldn’t even have made the finals:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1963_VFL_season

 

[Dangas]

This chart is interesting, clearly the Paul Roos influence on Ross Lyon depicted with Freo most defensive and doing circle work.

it continues on for Ross...

 

[The Swans Blog]

Sydney 98 - 71 Port Adelaide

Amazing. Too bad about the Port score, but exactly right about the Swans

 

[KillaKanga]

Sydney 98 - 71 Port Adelaide

Amazing. Too bad about the Port score, but exactly right about the Swans

Which means Port did exactly as expected by more than the squiggle thought.

and

The Swans lets the Power off the leash