Certified Legendary Thread Race for the flag, in squiggly lines

Remove this Banner Ad

DrEvil_

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 21, 2014
9,999
22,323
AFL Club
Hawthorn
His thread was locked because his ultimate troll was eventually up and his last rants turned personal.

He has been proven to be a:
  1. fraud,
  2. problem gambler,
  3. shyster,
  4. liar,
  5. flamer,
  6. troll,
  7. baiter,
  8. attention whore
And if people complain or report, every single one of those points can be quoted in his 4 years of posting on BigFooty.
And worst of all, people lapped it up. His thread was finally locked after years of nonsensical and decreasingly sophisticated trolling.

LOL. Got some more ironing to do chunky?
 
Apr 19, 2013
9,919
6,201
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
The Swans Blog
Final Siren looks like FootyMaths blog is catching up! Just 1 tip shy and he's taken the lead in <= 6 tips on winning games... Ohhh it's exciting! :D

Screen Shot 2015-07-05 at 21.24.44.png
Screen Shot 2015-07-05 at 21.24.55.png
 

Richo83

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 2, 2005
19,853
7,540
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
See above.

Your ranking of Adelaide has always been off. I suspect that, like me, you think that Adelaide have under-performed and that they should be comfortably in the eight. They have a decent side and quality in all sections of the ground. But eventually promise has to deliver and they've done nothing since 2012. Eventually they have to win games consistently or else they don't get rated. In 2013 they won 10 games, in 2014 they won 11. This year they were hot in the first two rounds, since then they've beaten five of the bottom six sides and lost to anyone above that. Eventually the talent actually has to start winning matches.

Putting Melbourne fourth was weird and unjustified. Some of your rankings are pure ass pulls or moments of insanity. And I'm pretty sure that final siren has given you heat because you've done it to him.

1. It's a representation of an idea of who is closest to the flag. It's not actual reality. At best it does just as good a job as the bookmakers, never better.

Well it's complicated, who will most likely make the grand final in round 10 may be different to who will make it in round 22. I predict that Fremantle will drop out of final siren's model soon. In fact, final siren in past years has been fairly sceptical of overly defensive sides and their ability to make and win grand finals.

2. Well yes it does it that.

And isn't that grand? Some Richmond fan tells me that Richmond needs to recruit a KPD and I point to the squiggle. This is better than 99.999999% of AFL content going around.

3. What is this eyeball test?

Watching games and making subjective assessments on who is good and who isn't.

4. Are the Bulldogs, Melbourne and St Kilda as bad as the Squiggle suggests?

I think it, like everyone understands that these sides are young and changing, but Melbourne and St Kilda aren't great sides. It's currently predicting that Footscray will finish 9th, like footy forecaster, they're currently 7th. Footy maths blog thinks that Footscray are most likely going to finish 12th.

And yet most of the talk is about tipping and forecasting. If it's not about those these why do those things get talked about the most.

Final siren mostly talks about offense and defense and who the model thinks will make the finals, it's a system which is fairly decent at tipping who the grand finalists will be, which will be proven if you look for final siren's post about his history of predicting grand finalists, preliminary and semi finalists. The rest of us talk about tipping because many of us are in tipping competitions and we want validation that our side will win this week. Final siren doesn't post his: "tips for round 13, tips against the favourites in red" each week.

Most models predicted Hawthorn or had Hawthorn on top.

You're hanging your head on a result that pretty much every model got wrong.

Yes and it was a similar issue I had with my model which I needed to improve.

Yeah so men in glasshouses and stone throwing then?

Other rankings systems around the world do so. I checked some NBA rankings recently and they were accounting for it.

A sport which involves five, not 22 players and basically invovles a quarterback running most plays. Oh and it's easier to quantify the performances of players too given most players have a shooting percentage and a rebound rate and a steal rate etc. Basketball (and baseball and, to an extent American football) are much more open to statistical analysis in terms of determining the weight of injuries.

Where is the abuse. I just said if you tip against it will make you money. How is that abuse? Did you read my previous post. I actually like checking the Squiggle. I don't like how Final Siren acts, belittling.

Dude, your needling of final siren when he fails, both in your thread and his are very thinly veiled.

Yes there are many limitations to my model, many more than this one, due to the fact it uses more parameters. You will find in my posts I have mentions limitations over and over, at ad nauseam. I do know why you haven't seen me post them because they are definitely there.

Yes, poor humble roby, explaining that he's just a humble mild mannered public servant offering his humble opinions on the state of current football in a humble manner. So self-aware and humble that words like this come out of your mouth!

Last update

The AFL Power Rankings retire as the best tipping model in Australia, 1000% profit and with the Gold Coast Suns on top of the rankings.

Personally I am going spend more time with my family and finish my novel.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

FootyGeek

Premiership Player
Feb 6, 2005
3,810
11,236
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Carlton
Other rankings systems around the world do so. I checked some NBA rankings recently and they were accounting for it.
Having personally tried to look at comparisons between NBA and hypothetical AFL Wins Above Replacement, you simply cannot compare the two.

In the NBA (and MLB for that matter) the nature of the game, regarding 5-man half court offence and defence, and in Baseball simply hitting or not, is that you are directly involved in the play. You can't do that in the AFL because you're not only looking at the quality of the player, you're actually looking at their ability to be involved. This is very important when you're looking at contested possessions - a player doesn't have to be a great ball user or quality player if they win a lot of contested ball, because a contested ball is just that, contested, they're not only winning the ball for his team, they're preventing the opposition from gaining possession. You cannot compare a player to a "replacement" player becuase that replacement player has a two-fold ability not only to be a good player when they're directly involved in the play, but to also get involved in the first place. There fluid nature of AFL and the fact that contested/stoppage situations exist as a facet of the game means that is simply nothing like that in other sports. If a hardened inside midfielder who could win the ball but an awful kick was replaced by a silky wingman, how do you account for the changes in the Wins Above Replacement with the fact that one player might improve his team's chances of winning stoppages but worsen his team's overall ball movement, and the other player would do it vice versa? Jackson Macrae for the Dogs might be a terrible floaty kick that turns it over, but at least he's getting the ball 30 times a match which means he's getting ot the right spots and providing an option for his teammates that means that we're able to extent of possession chains of play, rather than forcing a kick to a pack or an opposition player intercepting the ball. How can you measure that?
 

Richo83

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 2, 2005
19,853
7,540
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Having personally tried to look at comparisons between NBA and hypothetical AFL Wins Above Replacement, you simply cannot compare the two.

In the NBA (and MLB for that matter) the nature of the game, regarding 5-man half court offence and defence, and in Baseball simply hitting or not, is that you are directly involved in the play. You can't do that in the AFL because you're not only looking at the quality of the player, you're actually looking at their ability to be involved. This is very important when you're looking at contested possessions - a player doesn't have to be a great ball user or quality player if they win a lot of contested ball, because a contested ball is just that, contested, they're not only winning the ball for his team, they're preventing the opposition from gaining possession. You cannot compare a player to a "replacement" player becuase that replacement player has a two-fold ability not only to be a good player when they're directly involved in the play, but to also get involved in the first place. There fluid nature of AFL and the fact that contested/stoppage situations exist as a facet of the game means that is simply nothing like that in other sports. If a hardened inside midfielder who could win the ball but an awful kick was replaced by a silky wingman, how do you account for the changes in the Wins Above Replacement with the fact that one player might improve his team's chances of winning stoppages but worsen his team's overall ball movement, and the other player would do it vice versa? Jackson Macrae for the Dogs might be a terrible floaty kick that turns it over, but at least he's getting the ball 30 times a match which means he's getting ot the right spots and providing an option for his teammates that means that we're able to extent of possession chains of play, rather than forcing a kick to a pack or an opposition player intercepting the ball. How can you measure that?

Exactly. Plus, there are roles, such as back pocket which are hard to measure, how do you measure Nick Smith's effectiveness? Whereas in basketball, you can show a quality of a player by using stats because quality players do something, like scoring or rebounding or stealing which is measurable. You can even measure how many points a player's opponent scores on them to determine how good they are as a player. The reason why American sports are more open to statistical analysis, with metrics, sabermetrics and analytics isn't just because Americans are ahead of the rest of the world, but also because their sports lend themselves to such analysis. Just look at baseball, it is not a team game as much as an individual game played by groups of people who all happen to want the same thing. It's easily analytically measured because each play is broken up into separate plays.
 
Apr 19, 2013
9,919
6,201
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
The Swans Blog
if the finals forecast turns out to be accurate that would be epic, would love the Eagles to win a Derby match against Freo and Rossy Lyon failing to win a gf yet again.
Freo would easily beat Eagles at any venue, but wouldn't beat Swans or Hawks or even Collingwood at a neutral venue.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Richo83

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 2, 2005
19,853
7,540
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond

Darcy 2 Fyfe

Club Legend
Sep 20, 2011
1,920
2,771
Yallingup
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
West Perth
Freo would easily beat Eagles at any venue, but wouldn't beat Swans or Hawks or even Collingwood at a neutral venue.

Cheers for that but can you hold off telling the bookmakers. I'm going to plunge all the folding stuff I have now I know the results. Any chance of giving me the margins, I may go for and over or under multi?
 

Oneiros

Norm Smith Medallist
Jul 6, 2011
6,901
6,344
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Cleveland Browns, San Jose Sharks
A huge blast into uncharted waters for St Kilda's squiggle this year. Formalising the process of merging the middle pack and the bottom pack.

Interestingly, retrograde movements for the Top 5 squiggles outside of West Coast.

Edit: With the run home, its fascinating what can be accomplished when you aren't trying to arrange your fixture with blockbuster games and revenue in mind ;)
 

mattis117

Premium Platinum
Aug 20, 2010
4,785
8,940
Perth, Western Australia, Australia
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Manchester City
Alright, gonna repost some of what I posted but removed last night.

I have followed this thread since it's inception last season, where it was uncovered as a useful tool to visualise where your team is at. I am however getting annoyed how some people view this in almost a cult like status, where anyone who discusses the negatives of the squiggle are the enemy and get slammed by other posters who believe squiggle is the god of all statistical trackers.

Case in point is the witch hunt that follows Roby, and how even when he has very valid points about the accuracy of this model, he gets shut down heavily. Yes he has a very baffling thread of his own, that doesn't mean every point he makes is wrong.

The fact the squiggle only looks at results means it has many inherent flaws. It has been doing very poorly lately due to changes in teams that it cannot see - such as Essendon's struggles.

Posters need to remember that there is a lot that the squiggle cannot see, which is why it gets the results way off, like it did this round. Another example is Freo, who have played 5 games in wet conditions and have struggled to score as heavily as they did in the first 8 rounds. Freo clearly have become a more skillful team this year and have cut teams to shreds with clean ball movement early in the season. The rain has been an equaliser of these last 5 rounds, however the squiggle doesn't see it like that. Another point is that Collingwood challenged Freo, but couldn't get it done in the end, fast forward a week and they do the same to Hawthorn, however the comments that were made last week are vastly different to the ones made this week.

Anyway, TLDR, squiggle is NOT sacred, so stop acting like it is. I like it and use it weekly, but I am getting sick of people:
A. Berating others who have valid points that are negative towards the squiggle; and
B. Reading way more into the current situation of the squiggle than what it is designed for.
 
Alright, gonna repost some of what I posted but removed last night.

I have followed this thread since it's inception last season, where it was uncovered as a useful tool to visualise where your team is at. I am however getting annoyed how some people view this in almost a cult like status, where anyone who discusses the negatives of the squiggle are the enemy and get slammed by other posters who believe squiggle is the god of all statistical trackers.

Case in point is the witch hunt that follows Roby, and how even when he has very valid points about the accuracy of this model, he gets shut down heavily. Yes he has a very baffling thread of his own, that doesn't mean every point he makes is wrong.

The fact the squiggle only looks at results means it has many inherent flaws. It has been doing very poorly lately due to changes in teams that it cannot see - such as Essendon's struggles.

Posters need to remember that there is a lot that the squiggle cannot see, which is why it gets the results way off, like it did this round. Another example is Freo, who have played 5 games in wet conditions and have struggled to score as heavily as they did in the first 8 rounds. Freo clearly have become a more skillful team this year and have cut teams to shreds with clean ball movement early in the season. The rain has been an equaliser of these last 5 rounds, however the squiggle doesn't see it like that. Another point is that Collingwood challenged Freo, but couldn't get it done in the end, fast forward a week and they do the same to Hawthorn, however the comments that were made last week are vastly different to the ones made this week.

Anyway, TLDR, squiggle is NOT sacred, so stop acting like it is. I like it and use it weekly, but I am getting sick of people:
A. Berating others who have valid points that are negative towards the squiggle; and
B. Reading way more into the current situation of the squiggle than what it is designed for.
I think the issue is that Roby comes in flinging s**t with his delusions of grandeur, rattling on about how poor the Squiggle is for predicting winning bets. Final Siren has never tried to pass the Squiggle off as a betting aid and has been very up front regarding its weaknesses even as a tipping aid. It has always primarily been a visualisation tool of what has happened rather than a predictive tool of what will happen. If you've been following this since inception on here then you'd know that things like the tipping predictions and the ladder forecaster weren't originally part of the Squiggle and were only added following popular demand - and the accuracy of GF tipping has openly been noted as a work in progress. Final Siren has always been very up front regarding his system and how it works, and has never tried to make out that it is full proof or even the best at what it attempts to do. Roby has (or had) his own thread for his own system so when he comes in here just to throw rocks at this one then he isn't going to get a warm reception. The Squiggle isn't immune from critique but it should be immune from critique regarding things it's never tried to be (ie. a betting aid). It'd be like giving a car a bad review because it doesn't make a good boat or plane when all it's trying to be is a car.
 

Roby

Cancelled
10k Posts
Jul 27, 2008
13,241
11,501
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I think the issue is that Roby comes in flinging s**t with his delusions of grandeur, rattling on about how poor the Squiggle is for predicting winning bets. Final Siren has never tried to pass the Squiggle off as a betting aid and has been very up front regarding its weaknesses even as a tipping aid. It has always primarily been a visualisation tool of what has happened rather than a predictive tool of what will happen. If you've been following this since inception on here then you'd know that things like the tipping predictions and the ladder forecaster weren't originally part of the Squiggle and were only added following popular demand - and the accuracy of GF tipping has openly been noted as a work in progress. Final Siren has always been very up front regarding his system and how it works, and has never tried to make out that it is full proof or even the best at what it attempts to do. Roby has (or had) his own thread for his own system so when he comes in here just to throw rocks at this one then he isn't going to get a warm reception. The Squiggle isn't immune from critique but it should be immune from critique regarding things it's never tried to be (ie. a betting aid). It'd be like giving a car a bad review because it doesn't make a good boat or plane when all it's trying to be is a car.


Please.

First of all the comment you replied to was not directed at Final Siren but the numerous legions of people who think it's some of sort of demi-god almost perfect system when it's actually far from that.

Secondly it appears that criticism is now off limits.

Stop pretending it's not about tipping or forecast when most of the discussion in regards to the squiggle is regarding tipping and forecasting.

Even in Final Sirens last post he mentions its designed for tipping. The thread is called "a race" there fore it's just about the "final result"/"final siren" as is it about progress of teams.

Even mentioning that it was not initially for forecasting makes it even worse.

If I bought a Lambroghini and the next day a Hyundai beat me around the race track do I say "Hey, whatver dude, my manafacturer was orginally designed to make trucks and was never designed for racetracks!"

Saying it's not immune from criticism but then saying it is immune from criticisms in things it's not designed to be is virtually giving it a free hit to get things right and completely ignoring any misgivings.

BYy the way it's not about betting but someone here seems to think for doing so.

Cheers for that but can you hold off telling the bookmakers. I'm going to plunge all the folding stuff I have now I know the results. Any chance of giving me the margins, I may go for and over or under multi?

p.s. below was part of my first post that was posted four years ago.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/2011-afl-power-rankings-rd3.812821/

Of course this doesn't take into account team's potential, matchup anomalies, teams developing strategies or finals expectations. While these are important considerations they are too difficult to quantify, so the power rankings are mainly an arbitrary indication of team performance.

I'm sure the rankings will not be agreed and the formula will be revised over time but these are my unofficial power rankings so far:

By the way I though this was an open forum for discussion, what is the issue?
 
Last edited:
Final Siren has never said that The Squiggle was meant to be the most accurate tipster or model.

He has said "The predictive model is solid and unspectacular: it's roughly as accurate as tipping the favourite every game. (Which is hard to beat!) Over a season, a well-informed, intelligent human observer should be able to beat it... but not by much."

But he has said it has benefits of:
- requiring only two inputs
- being easy to understand
- giving a better indication of form than the ladder
 
Back