Certified Legendary Thread Race for the flag, in squiggly lines

[JayJ20]

Keen to see 2017's squiggle

 

[Seppo]

Final Siren Any plans on updating the Squiggle soon?

 

[Dirty Bird]

Surely the Dogs and Saints had a bigger claim than them that year that it should've been theirs.....

Geelong shouldn't have lost to North first week, simples

Dog fans and saint fans do feel it was one that got away, but they don't feel it was robbed.
Geelong fans do, hence my comment.

 

[Ricky Vaughn]

Dog fans and saint fans do feel it was one that got away, but they don't feel it was robbed.
Geelong fans do, hence my comment.

Geelong fans don't think we were robbed of the flag in 97, we wouldn't have won it even if we won the semi.

We just got robbed in the 97 Semi Final by terrible umpires. It happened and we moved on.

I find Adelaide fans are the ones who can't move on from that game, you struggle to accept that the umpires played a large role in your 1997 Premiership, hence you bringing it up unprompted.
The umpires played no role is us not winning the 1997 flag, we did that all on our own by losing to North week 1.

 

[ok.crows]

We just got robbed in the 97 Semi Final by terrible umpires. It happened and we moved on.

I find Adelaide fans are the ones who can't move on from that game, you struggle to accept that the umpires played a large role in your 1997 Premiership, hence you bringing it up unprompted.

Au contraire it is Geelong fans who don't accept the facts about this game. Certainly Colbert was not paid a mark he should have been paid, and Adelaide got a goal as a consequence, but in the same game Modra was also not paid a clear mark 30m out straight in front, and Adelaide missed out on an almost certain goal as a consequence. Also in the same game Burns kicked a ball in the goalsquare which ricocheted of Bickley's boot before going through, and that was awarded as a goal to Geelong where it should have been only a point.

Geelong were not robbed by umpires in the 1997 Semi Final, despite Colbert's non-awarded mark.

 

[Ricky Vaughn]

Au contraire it is Geelong fans who don't accept the facts about this game. Certainly Colbert was not paid a mark he should have been paid, and Adelaide got a goal as a consequence, but in the same game Modra was also not paid a clear mark 30m out straight in front, and Adelaide missed out on an almost certain goal as a consequence. Also in the same game Burns kicked a ball in the goalsquare which ricocheted of Bickley's boot before going through, and that was awarded as a goal to Geelong where it should have been only a point.

Geelong were not robbed by umpires in the 1997 Semi Final, despite Colbert's non-awarded mark.

Without reviewing the game again (seriously, what would be the point), I think the reason you've clung on to these 2 examples, while ignoring all others shows that you are aware the umpiring was heavily biased towards the home team, but admitting it means your flag might be de-valued slightly.

Here's a tip. Nothing can de-value the 97 flag. You got some luck along the way, which is in line with any other Premiership side ever to lift the Cup.

 

[ok.crows]

Without reviewing the game again (seriously, what would be the point), I think the reason you've clung on to these 2 examples, while ignoring all others shows that you are aware the umpiring was heavily biased towards the home team, but admitting it means your flag might be de-valued slightly.

Nope. The one and only reason the umpiring in this game is remembered is because of Geelong fans bitching about it (without good reason, mostly just noise about one mark) for years and years afterwards.

 

[ManOfClay]

Nope. The one and only reason the umpiring in this game is remembered is because of Geelong fans bitching about it (without good reason, mostly just noise about one mark) for years and years afterwards.

Ironic given Adelaide supporters love to bring up the umpiring helping their opponents

 

[ok.crows]

Ironic given Adelaide supporters love to bring up the umpiring helping their opponents

That is not given.

 

[gangsta deluxe]

That is not given.

#notalladelaidesupporters

 

[GreyCrow]

#notalladelaidesupporters

#Disgusting

 

[_Mike_]

Dog fans and saint fans do feel it was one that got away, but they don't feel it was robbed

Poor coaching and bad kicking cost us that game, nothing else

 

[GetDimmaBack]

Poor coaching and bad kicking cost us that game, nothing else

Not to mention poor selection.

Why play an injured Romero instead of a fighting fit Billy Kolyniuk?

Thought it was crazy at the time, and then Jose does the shoulder again in the first quarter and has 8 touches for the day...

Anyone think Billy might have been good for at least one goal in a hectic last quarter?

That was his specialty!

 

[Seeds]

How has the squiggle not been retired after its 2016 disaster.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

How has the squiggle not been retired after its 2016 disaster.

Disaster?

A statistical model based solely on week-to-week scores failed to accurately predict what was an extremely inconsistent season. It's not exactly surprising.

It's still a very interesting resource regardless.

 

[SJ]

How has the squiggle not been retired after its 2016 disaster.

"All models are wrong, but some are useful."

Let me know when you find a model which tipped the Bulldogs in 2016!

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

"All models are wrong, but some are useful."

Let me know when you find a model which tipped the Bulldogs in 2016!

Does Roby still post? Despite all his other issues, his ratings system did supposedly use a combination of individual players contribution ratings and would have represented a large spike in the Bulldogs returning group during finals.

 

[SwampCreature]

I'm Roby's alias, so yes

 

[Boristown]

Squiggle is still recovering from predicting Hillary as the next US president.

 

[Headless]

How has the squiggle not been retired after its 2016 disaster.

 

[Seeds]

"All models are wrong, but some are useful."

Let me know when you find a model which tipped the Bulldogs in 2016!

I'm an advocate of models but I'm not sure any currently around are useful in predicting football tipping. Improving the probability of tips to be better than a coin toss through logical assumptions such as home ground advantage and recent win loss performance aren't all that interesting or useful except for people who are riddled with irrationality and poor memory.

Detailed models are needed that properly account for things like injuries, likely head to head match ups of key players, potential mismatches in certain positions on the field, whether the teams looked lethargic in the last quarter of their previous game, word clouds on press conferences, player face book posts and player interviews in the week before the game to gauge how the players have reacted to their previous game etc. When these are created and properly validated to have independent statistical significance then I will start paying attention to them. Until then it's questionable as to whether the current models are anything more than snake oil.

 

[SJ]

I'm an advocate of models but I'm not sure any currently around are useful in predicting football tipping. Improving the probability of tips to be better than a coin toss through logical assumptions such as home ground advantage and recent win loss performance aren't all that interesting or useful except for people who are riddled with irrationality and poor memory.

Detailed models are needed that properly account for things like injuries, likely head to head match ups of key players, potential mismatches in certain positions on the field, whether the teams looked lethargic in the last quarter of their previous game, word clouds on press conferences, player face book posts and player interviews in the week before the game to gauge how the players have reacted to their previous game etc. When these are created and properly validated to have independent statistical significance then I will start paying attention to them. Until then it's questionable as to whether the current models are anything more than snake oil.

But remember, The Squiggle was not created to be the best tipper or the best model. It was created to be a visual indicator of where teams sit both comparatively to eachother and over time.

 

[Headless]

But remember, The Squiggle was not created to be the best tipper or the best model. It was created to be a visual indicator of where teams sit both comparatively to eachother and over time.

This this this ffs so much this.

 

[Final Siren]

I'm an advocate of models but I'm not sure any currently around are useful in predicting football tipping. Improving the probability of tips to be better than a coin toss through logical assumptions such as home ground advantage and recent win loss performance aren't all that interesting or useful except for people who are riddled with irrationality and poor memory.

Detailed models are needed that properly account for things like injuries, likely head to head match ups of key players, potential mismatches in certain positions on the field, whether the teams looked lethargic in the last quarter of their previous game, word clouds on press conferences, player face book posts and player interviews in the week before the game to gauge how the players have reacted to their previous game etc. When these are created and properly validated to have independent statistical significance then I will start paying attention to them. Until then it's questionable as to whether the current models are anything more than snake oil.

It's pretty easy to tell how effective most of the models floating around are, because their performance is documented over several years. They generally go at around 68-74%, depending on the year. If you track your own tipping, you can see whether you beat them or not.

The kind of perfect model you describe, which uses dozens of different inputs, doesn't sound very good to me, because it would inevitably introduce more noise than signal. This is the overfitting problem, where if you give a model a ton of different factors, it will fit the historical data really well, but can't predict anything, because all it does is find a bunch of coincidences. For example, I bet you could find one particular seat at the MCG where almost every game in 2016 was won by the team whose supporter sat there. That fits the data well but has no predictive power.

The smart way to use a model, in my opinion, is as a tool rather than a Magic Eight-Ball. Because while computer models are better than most punters, they're not better than good punters. They're really best at aggregating large amounts of data that humans have trouble remembering all at once. So you don't want to take their predictions as gospel, but if you can understand what they're measuring and why they're reaching the conclusions they are, that's a good input for the model you're running inside your human brain.

Also, you know, when you just haven't been paying attention to the footy recently, then that's a good time to snag their tips.

 

[GreyCrow]

I'm an advocate of models

Me too. The more super the better. But that Naomi can GAGF

Detailed models are needed that properly account for things like injuries, likely head to head match ups of key players, potential mismatches in certain positions on the field, whether the teams looked lethargic in the last quarter of their previous game, word clouds on press conferences, player face book posts and player interviews in the week before the game to gauge how the players have reacted to their previous game etc. When these are created and properly validated to have independent statistical significance then I will start paying attention to them. Until then it's questionable as to whether the current models are anything more than snake oil.

You are asking for all the things that only you can determine. AFL is such a moving beast that you cant predict match-ups because the current model is to move players if they are being beaten. Its not the 70s anymore.

Lethargy? May as well look for ducks flying across 10 minutes before the game. Lethargy can only be guessed at through statistical modelling which suggests ie 2 6 day breaks will more likely cause a team to lose. Word clouds and Facebook posts?? Not enough data. The numbers just aren't there to affect the %. Sure Twitter and Facebook can do it due to the large numbers but 800 footballers randomly posting wont give you much as they are controlled by the club ( for the most part)

Just a question but how much do you punt a year and what system do you use?