|
The footy discussion thread (pg. 31)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| srussell0018 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Taipan
Odds are NOT predictions . |
So basically you're saying the chart you posted has all to do with predicting who will be Chelsea's next manager. Got it.
You're trying to support your claim that he will be the next manager. You used that chart to support it. So your argument is that a number of other people agree with you. This does not validate your claim in any way, as you just pointed out. The whole crux of your argument is an argumentum ad populum fallacy. I'm sure you don't know what that means either, since epistomological flew right by your head, but google should help you out. |
|
|
| Taipan |
| quote: | Originally posted by srussell0018
Epistomology. |
Right, because understanding simple concepts like odds and probability is less important than knowing 12 letter words. But that is besides the point. I recognize my own shortcomings (even when I didn't have to) and not try to dig myself out of a hole of embarrassment. Are you really trying to make fun of me for something that I pointed out in myself? It doesn't work like that, buddy. |
|
|
| Taipan |
| quote: | Originally posted by srussell0018
So basically you're saying the chart you posted has all to do with predicting who will be Chelsea's next manager. Got it.
You're trying to support your claim that he will be the next manager. You used that chart to support it. So your argument is that a number of other people agree with you. This does not validate your claim in any way, as you just pointed out. The whole crux of your argument is an argumentum ad populum fallacy. I'm sure you don't know what that means either, since epistomological flew right by your head, but google should help you out. |
Odds are not predictions. A string of simple words that you fail to grasp the meaning.
I never claimed that Pep will be the next manager and I shouldn't have to bother responding to people who put words in my mouth.
But since you need me to break this down for you , I'll do it one last time.
I am showing you what the CHANCES are that Pep will be the next manager. The odds demonstrate what the chances are at this point in time. If you know better than the bookmakers, then what the are doing arguing with me online? Go place your bets! |
|
|
| Taipan |
| quote: | Originally posted by srussell0018
So basically you're saying the chart you posted has all to do with predicting who will be Chelsea's next manager. |
It is impossible to predict who the next Chelsea manager will be. Nobody can see the future - do you not understand this?
Odds can only tell you what the chances are. Very simple. |
|
|
| srussell0018 |
| If odds aren't predictions, then how does one predict the odds? |
|
|
| Taipan |
| quote: | Originally posted by srussell0018
You're trying to support your claim that he will be the next manager. |
I'm trying to support the FACT that he is second favorite to take over at this point in time. |
|
|
| Taipan |
| quote: | Originally posted by srussell0018
If odds aren't predictions, then how does one predict the odds? |
For anyone else I would assume you are joking, but since I really think you are mentally handicapped I will explain in the most simple terms possible.
If you flip a coin three times, chances are that you will get heads at least once. So bookmakers make the odds for this outcome very low. The chances you get tails 3 times in a row are very small, so bookmakers make these odds very high. Odds are adjusted according to probability and speculation, but do not influence the outcome of the event.
Just because something is favorite does not mean it will necessarily happen.
This is why "people bet against the odds" like you say. Or in normal people language "people bet against the favorite", because they get higher odds and higher pay off.
Does that make sense? |
|
|
| srussell0018 |
| Oh that's a fact now is it? According to you, there's just a chance that he is. Isn't that what you've been harping on all along? |
|
|
| srussell0018 |
:stongue:
How red is your face right now? |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by Taipan
If you are trying to say that some odds are completely straight forward - like who will win a coin toss - then these odds can also been seen as driven by speculation because the speculation will be just as straight forward. Everyone will give these odds a 50/50 chance, then based on the collective opinion , bookmakers will assign EVS odds. |
Some odds are based on mathematical probability. The odds of a coin flip's outcome are not 50/50 because everyone agrees, they're 50/50 because that is mathematical fact. The odds you have cited are not mathematical fact at all - they measure the likelihood of an outcome that cannot be equated mathematically. Your statement odds don't lie suggests that these odds are factual statements of probability as to whether Pep Guardiola will be the next manager of Chelsea. In reality, they demonstrate nothing more than that William Hill think it's profitable to offer odds of 2/1 on that bet. Which, frankly, I don't care about, and neither do I care who is favourite, or who is second favourite. The collective ignorance of others has no influence on my opinion of Guardiola's career.
I've already accused you in this thread of supporting common misconceptions, so posting bookie's odds does nothing to make me think you're capable of independent judgement. |
|
|
| srussell0018 |
| But they're right there! In a chart and everything! |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| I'd really prefer it if you didn't associate your arguments with mine, to be honest. You are, frankly, at debating, and it's much more difficult to win when I'm having to carry you on my back as well. |
|
|
|
|
