Prediction 2023 Ladder Prediction Thread

[Fadge]

Imagine my ladder predictor being more accurate than yours, glad you dug it up for me Fadge

Can't be bothered doing a spreadsheet though

Imagine you posting clusters of teams in a Ladder Prediction thread, and gloating that your 'Ladder Predictor' is better than mine (which may very well be the most accurate in the entire thread - I'm still waiting for evidence to the contrary), despite the fact you didn't even do a Ladder Predictor.

But that's OK. Because I'm here to call you out on your deceitfulness.

I've taken the five minutes required to transform your 'clusters' into Ladder Predictors, and the results are in!

Because you only shared 'clusters' - I have deduced two scenarios - best case (Arrow BC) and worst case (Arrow WC), with the outcomes as follows:


As you can see, if you ranked the teams from your respective clusters in the absolute best case scenario, your resulting Ladder Predictor is AS ACCURATE as mine. That is the ABSOLUTE BEST CASE. But we do know the likelihood (or dare I say, probability) of that being the case though, don't we? Particularly when we take into consideration the fact you had previously declared Collingwood weren't going to be making top 4, and also nominated Brisbane as the big drifter.

Obviously, when your best case scenario is only as accurate as my actual Ladder Predictor, your worst case scenario is miles off. Miles.

So from this we can deduce:

• Fadge's Ladder Predictor is in the top one percentile of all Ladder Predictions in the thread. Starting with Collingwood and Brisbane as the top 2 teams, in that order;
• Arr0w's clustered groupings are in the bottom 20% of all analyses in the thread. Starting with Richmond (LOL), Melbourne (Hmmm) and Geelong (forgivable) as the Top 3 teams. Followed by your declarations re: Collingwood and Brisbane (referenced above).

Wowee.

 

[RPCB]

Unbelievable dick measuring competition over who’s ladder prediction was the best.

Would read again.

 

[Arr0w]

Imagine you posting clusters of teams in a Ladder Prediction thread, and gloating that your 'Ladder Predictor' is better than mine (which may very well be the most accurate in the entire thread - I'm still waiting for evidence to the contrary), despite the fact you didn't even do a Ladder Predictor.

But that's OK. Because I'm here to call you out on your deceitfulness.

You mean my predictions that you highlighted, but now claim is not really a prediction, hilarious

I've taken the five minutes required to transform your 'clusters' into Ladder Predictors, and the results are in!

Because you only shared 'clusters' - I have deduced two scenarios - best case (Arrow BC) and worst case (Arrow WC), with the outcomes as follows:
View attachment 1808571

Oh my, another spreadsheet to try and justify your superiority

As you can see, if you ranked the teams from your respective clusters in the absolute best case scenario, your resulting Ladder Predictor is AS ACCURATE as mine. That is the ABSOLUTE BEST CASE. But we do know the likelihood (or dare I say, probability) of that being the case though, don't we? Particularly when we take into consideration the fact you had previously declared Collingwood weren't going to be making top 4, and also nominated Brisbane as the big drifter.

Obviously, when your best case scenario is only as accurate as my actual Ladder Predictor, your worst case scenario is miles off. Miles.

So from this we can deduce:

• Fadge's Ladder Predictor is in the top one percentile of all Ladder Predictions in the thread. Starting with Collingwood and Brisbane as the top 2 teams, in that order;
• Arr0w's clustered groupings are in the bottom 20% of all analyses in the thread. Starting with Richmond (LOL), Melbourne (Hmmm) and Geelong (forgivable) as the Top 3 teams. Followed by your declarations re: Collingwood and Brisbane (referenced above).

Wowee.

So even manipulating finishing positions, you still can't gain an advantage. 6 of my top 10 finished in finals, to your 5

Facts are, you have claimed multiple times that your predictions are unmatched, by any other poster, you then go searching for my predictions only to discover that at the very least mine are on par, glorious

Can't wait till you roll out and explain your "probability" of Carlton being flagless for 50 years. But suspect you're not brave enough with that failed analysis

Been fun again Fadge

 

[Fadge]

Facts are, you have claimed multiple times that your predictions are unmatched, by any other poster, you then go searching for my predictions only to discover that at the very least mine are on par, glorious

Comprehension not a strength of yours?

'At the very least mine [Arr0w's] are on a par [with Fadge's]'.

Oh my.

Can't wait till you roll out and explain your "probability" of Carlton being flagless for 50 years. But suspect you're not brave enough with that failed analysis

Oh. I didn't realise Carlton's premiership drought had ended?

 

[Arr0w]

Oh. I didn't realise Carlton's premiership drought had ended?

Go on, share that failed analysis with the masses, we need another laugh

Think we are done yeah?

 

[Fadge]

Go on, share that failed analysis with the masses, we need another laugh

Think we are done yeah?

What makes it failed?

I stated at the end of last year, Carlton were a 27% chance to have their current premiership drought extend to 50 years.

Which was correct at the time.

If it was wrong, what should it have been?

 

[BrainOfMorbius]

You idiots do realise that Squiggle has a tool to independently measure how accurate your ladder prediction was, don't you?

 

[Arr0w]

What makes it failed?

I stated at the end of last year, Carlton were a 27% chance to have their current premiership drought extend to 50 years.

Which was correct at the time.

If it was wrong, what should it have been?

Not "chance" you state "probability"

Your analysis/calculations is based on 18 teams right?

 

[Jeremias]

You idiots do realise that Squiggle has a tool to independently measure how accurate your ladder prediction was, don't you?

Who needs that when you’re a master of your own spreadsheet?

 

[ChristianBoy]

Who is going to be the 'Collingwood' of 2023? My prediction is that GWS will make the 8

Great tip and did it without all the AFL fixture gifts unlike Collingwood.

 

[Fadge]

Not "chance" you state "probability"

Your analysis/calculations is based on 18 teams right?

Go ahead - I've stated there is a 27% chance/probability (the terms are interchangeable in this context) that Carlton's current premiership drought will extend to 50 years.

If you disagree, shows us your workings and conclusion.

This will be fun.

 

[Fadge]

You idiots do realise that Squiggle has a tool to independently measure how accurate your ladder prediction was, don't you?

No, I didn't.

But I expect it would use a similar algorithm to that which I used, and it took me all of 5 minutes to work out the relative accuracies of 5 different ladder predictions.

Why would I invest time and energy searching for an on-line tool, feeding the data into that tool, only to come to the same conclusion as I already have with minimal effort?

 

[Arr0w]

Go ahead - I've stated there is a 27% chance/probability (the terms are interchangeable in this context) that Carlton's current premiership drought will extend to 50 years.

If you disagree, shows us your workings and conclusion.

This will be fun.

I guess one of the vital conditions, (which you knew about at the time of your calculations) did not include a 19th team entering the league in the remaining years of your theory

Back to the chalkboard Fadge

 

[BrainOfMorbius]

No, I didn't.

But I expect it would use a similar algorithm to that which I used, and it took me all of 5 minutes to work out the relative accuracies of 5 different ladder predictions.

Why would I invest time and energy searching for an on-line tool, feeding the data into that tool, only to come to the same conclusion as I already have with minimal effort?

Because if you do it yourself no-one will care due to the possibility/likelihood that your algorithm will have built-in bias to ensure you come out on top. Don't take this the wrong way, but you have a tendency to big-note yourself.

If you use an independent tool that anyone can check and access themselves and you still come out on top, then you're aces and can big-note yourself to your heart's delight.

 

[Fadge]

I guess one of the vital conditions, (which you knew about at the time of your calculations) did not include a 19th team entering the league in the remaining years of your theory

Back to the chalkboard Fadge

I actually qualified that condition at the time, and it is barely material (given we could potentially also see merged/disbanded teams over the same duration).

Anyway, put up or shut up - what is the probability of Carlton's current premiership drought extending to 50 years, if it's not 27% as per my calculation from before the start of this season? Complete with workings please.

You're the one who brought this up...

 

[Fadge]

Because if you do it yourself no-one will care due to the possibility/likelihood that your algorithm will have built-in bias to ensure you come out on top. Don't take this the wrong way, but you have a tendency to big-note yourself.

If you use an independent tool that anyone can check and access themselves and you still come out on top, then you're aces and can big-note yourself to your heart's delight.

Huh, I shared the workings.

What difference would you expect there to be between my logic and the algorithm that sits behind an independent tool?

 

[JyeDye]

Imagine you posting clusters of teams in a Ladder Prediction thread, and gloating that your 'Ladder Predictor' is better than mine (which may very well be the most accurate in the entire thread - I'm still waiting for evidence to the contrary), despite the fact you didn't even do a Ladder Predictor.

But that's OK. Because I'm here to call you out on your deceitfulness.

I've taken the five minutes required to transform your 'clusters' into Ladder Predictors, and the results are in!

Because you only shared 'clusters' - I have deduced two scenarios - best case (Arrow BC) and worst case (Arrow WC), with the outcomes as follows:
View attachment 1808571

As you can see, if you ranked the teams from your respective clusters in the absolute best case scenario, your resulting Ladder Predictor is AS ACCURATE as mine. That is the ABSOLUTE BEST CASE. But we do know the likelihood (or dare I say, probability) of that being the case though, don't we? Particularly when we take into consideration the fact you had previously declared Collingwood weren't going to be making top 4, and also nominated Brisbane as the big drifter.

Obviously, when your best case scenario is only as accurate as my actual Ladder Predictor, your worst case scenario is miles off. Miles.

So from this we can deduce:

• Fadge's Ladder Predictor is in the top one percentile of all Ladder Predictions in the thread. Starting with Collingwood and Brisbane as the top 2 teams, in that order;
• Arr0w's clustered groupings are in the bottom 20% of all analyses in the thread. Starting with Richmond (LOL), Melbourne (Hmmm) and Geelong (forgivable) as the Top 3 teams. Followed by your declarations re: Collingwood and Brisbane (referenced above).

Wowee.

Explain this then?

 

[Fadge]

Explain this then?

View attachment 1808671

That's actually very funny.

But maybe the conclusion should be average size instead of total?

And why is yours at it's biggest after a cold swim?

 

[RPCB]

Explain this then?

View attachment 1808671

I still don’t know what’s going on but what I do know is that the Carlton supporter is winning.

 

[TheUnicorn]

1. Sydney
2. Doggies
3. Geelong
4. Melbourne
5. Brisbane
6. Richmond
7. Collingwood
8. Port Adelaide
_______________________

9. Carlton
10. Fremantle
11. Gold Coast
12. Essendon
13. St kilda
14. North Melbourne
15. Adelaide
16. Hawthorn
17. GWS
18. West coast

Mine was terrible

 

[Arr0w]

I actually qualified that condition at the time, and it is barely material (given we could potentially also see merged/disbanded teams over the same duration).

Anyway, put up or shut up - what is the probability of Carlton's current premiership drought extending to 50 years, if it's not 27% as per my calculation from before the start of this season? Complete with workings please.

You're the one who brought this up...

So that's a no, you didn't include a 19th team as part of your calculations over a 22 year period. Lightweight

I am certainly done here

 

[Fadge]

So that's a no, you didn't include a 19th team as part of your calculations over a 22 year period. Lightweight

I am certainly done here

Standard MO.

'You're wrong! But I'm not going to provide any facts or evidence to support my assertion.'

Did you actually read my response above, and my rationale for the calculation/conclusion at the time.

So if it's wasn't 27% at the time (which has probably reduced to about 26% right now, but would have been about 29% at the midway point of the season), what is it?

Come on, don't run and hide.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

This is actually the dick measuring thread, or so the last few pages would suggest anyway

And they aren't even measuring properly. Just use Squiggle's "rate my ladder" as a neutral and pretty good arbiter.
edit: I see already mkentioned

 

[Fadge]

And they aren't even measuring properly. Just use Squiggle's "rate my ladder" as a neutral and pretty good arbiter.
edit: I see already mkentioned

How does Squiggle's 'Rate my ladder' work?

You've seen how I've measured my ladder prediction (and other ladder predictions) - happy to hear of a better method.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

So let's see how I go

1. Melbourne

People forget the dominance of their mids and their solid backline. Will brute force scoring through repeated entries to Fritz and Kozi without needing Brown to be an afl level player.

2. Brisbane

Ran out of steam. Good trade and draft period. Not sure they can win enough at the mcg but will slam a few sides.

3. Richmond

Two quality midfield additions gets their structure back on track. Some defensive concerns and probably some learning curve with new faces. The body remembers but their brand will change.

4. Geelong

Reversion to mean with a more normal run of injuries. Risk to depth in kpd and ruck remain. Enough new talent and depth to cover most kinds of injuries and incorporate a few new looks

5. Collingwood

Probably a similar year. I don't expect much from Tom Mitchell and think he could actually work against what made them good last year

6. Fremantle

Lobb is a difficult one to cover but expect natural development from their list and a fit Fyfe will take them a long way.

7. Sydney

Natural progression of a good young list offsets a bit of a step back by the group after a GF mauling that historically teams don't rebound from.

8. Carlton

Too much talent to miss the 8. Same as last year.....

9. Western Bulldogs

Think there will be a bit of adjustment with new structures based on thinner midfield. Could start to come good by year end

10. Port

Bye Kenny. Hopefully your exit is as dignified as the dignity you have given port since taking them over.

11. Gold Coast

Could make the 8 in my opinion but probably one more year of development and they start stomping lesser sides.

12. Essendon

Bit of new coach bounce but not Collingwood 2022 level

13. St kilda

I want to believe in new coach bounce here but don't think they have the talent base just yet

14. GWS

Not sure where I stand. They actually might just turn into a cohesive unit with all the wantaways pushed out the door but maybe not

15. Adelaide

Bit of natural development

16. West Coast

Need to stop the spiral.

17. North

It'll be incremental improvement. Small increments

18. Hawthorn

Some developing talent forward and better talent developing back, but changing the midfield over is like changing the lead singer in a band. You could throw a blanket over this bottom 4 but the amount of midfield experience out the door is sounding an alarm.

Could be way off but I'll chuck it out there

Epilogue: not great