The average supporter is of below average intelligence

Remove this Banner Ad

Bulldog Joe

Premiership Player
May 23, 2008
3,787
1,575
Tasmania
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Lost the plot in my opinion

Some players could be more effective as captain - coaches in my opinion

First option Dale Morris

lets drop this overrated tool

Well you are entitled to have an opinion and to express an opinion.

Everyone else can take solace that all your opinions can then be easily ignored.

We can understand people have uninformed opinion.... after all the majority of people are below average intelligence.
 
Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

Well you are entitled to have an opinion and to express an opinion.

Everyone else can take solace that all your opinions can then be easily ignored.

We can understand people have uninformed opinion.... after all the majority of people are below average intelligence.

Phone call for Bulldog Joe from Stan the Statistician!
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

Fossie is that an endorsement or questioning of my point ?

The majority are below average in anything you measure.



It is likely that about half the population are below average and about half above average.


imho :eek:
 
Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

Joe, I am below average in intelligence. So can you explain it to me?

Shouldn't there be half below the average and half above it?

The half way point is called the mean and equalises the numbers above and below. It takes no account of the amount by which an individual is above or below.

The average is different and best explained by perhaps looking at batting averages.

If a batsman bats ten times and records scores of 0, 0, 10, 12, 20, 20,30, 40, 40 and 200 he has scored a total of 372.
His average is 37.2 but has only 3 scores above the average.
The mean is 20 - 5 scores 20 or below and 5 scores 20 or above.

So ends today's class on statistics.
 
Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

The half way point is called the mean and equalises the numbers above and below. It takes no account of the amount by which an individual is above or below.

The average is different and best explained by perhaps looking at batting averages.

...

So ends today's class on statistics.

Sorry BJ, but what you call the mean is actually the median (the mid point in an ordered series). The mean is actually the same thing as the average.
 
Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

Sorry BJ, but what you call the mean is actually the median (the mid point in an ordered series). The mean is actually the same thing as the average.

Sorry dogwatch.
Managed to get my terms confused.

Yes the mid point is actually the median.

Still holds true that the majority are always below average.
 
Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

Sorry dogwatch.
Managed to get my terms confused.

Yes the mid point is actually the median.

Still holds true that the majority are always below average.

Not necessarily ... take the following series (these could be BF IQs!):

50 54 60 70 90 110 110 120 120 120 130

The average (or mean) is 94.
There are 6 above it and 5 below it.
[The median is 110 ... and the mode is 120, for the stats buffs]

Now, what has this got to do with Eade's coaching? I think we've lost track of what this was all about!
 
Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

I think BulldogJoe is talking about Maths like an "amatuer"

Get Dale Morris to explain Maths to him!

EDIT: I take it all back! I just thought of a way in which a majority CAN always be below average!

A majority of the theories that BulldogJoe comes up with are below average.

See?
 
Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

Not necessarily ... take the following series (these could be BF IQs!):

50 54 60 70 90 110 110 120 120 120 130

The average (or mean) is 94.
There are 6 above it and 5 below it.
[The median is 110 ... and the mode is 120, for the stats buffs]

Now, what has this got to do with Eade's coaching? I think we've lost track of what this was all about!


Yes, could just as well arbitarily say the majority of people are above average intelligence
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

Yes, could just as well arbitarily say the majority of people are above average intelligence

Sorry Fossie
The majority will ALWAYS be below average.

You need to understand that there is more limit to the downside -- no-one is below zero
but the upside is unlimited.

I apologise that the majority struggle to cope with the concept...

but that does sort of prove the point.

Note this is not a theory but a statistical fact.
 
Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

If you think of intelligence in terms of IQ scores, for the most widely used tests (the Wechsler series), there is a floor at 40 and a ceiling at 160 IQ points, and they are normed so that exactly half of the population sits above and below a score of 100 (though, some time after norming, you would most likely find that a majority of the population will have scores greater than the "average" of 100, due to the rise in IQ scores over time known as the Flynn Effect).
 
Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

If you think of intelligence in terms of IQ scores, for the most widely used tests (the Wechsler series), there is a floor at 40 and a ceiling at 160 IQ points, and they are normed so that exactly half of the population sits above and below a score of 100 (though, some time after norming, you would most likely find that a majority of the population will have scores greater than the "average" of 100, due to the rise in IQ scores over time known as the Flynn Effect).

Thanks Arkangel - good contribution. I see that the Flynn effect is also more pronounced in the lower half of the population so it further strengthens the point that if the distribution is skewed in any direction it is skewed above 100.

However IQ scoring gets periodically re-standardised for the express purpose of making sure half the population is above and half below 100. (BJ, take note!)

However this is using 100 as the median - it is not necessarily a mean. Arkangel, have you any information as to what the mean IQ is in the general population? Is it 100 also? I'm assuming it would be very close but would almost certainly not be exactly 100.

For double points what is the mean of the BF population?

And for a bonus point, where does Rodney Eade sit on the Wechsler scale? (We need to get this back on topic somehow!)
 
Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

Sorry dogwatch.
Managed to get my terms confused.

Yes the mid point is actually the median.

Still holds true that the majority are always below average.

Quit whilst you are only a little bit behind Joe. You are dead wrong...
 
Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

Quit whilst you are only a little bit behind Joe. You are dead wrong...

Sorry LongWait but I am absolutely and infallibly correct on this one.

While dogwatch and arkangel raise interesting points about the IQ scale that is artificially manipulated to give an effect.


Does anyone seriously believe that Stephen Hawking is only 4 times as smart as the dumbest person on the planet (perhaps a member of the Collingwood cheer squad.)

I don't have a problem with people struggling to understand my point.
 
Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

Thanks Arkangel - good contribution. I see that the Flynn effect is also more pronounced in the lower half of the population so it further strengthens the point that if the distribution is skewed in any direction it is skewed above 100.

However IQ scoring gets periodically re-standardised for the express purpose of making sure half the population is above and half below 100. (BJ, take note!)

However this is using 100 as the median - it is not necessarily a mean. Arkangel, have you any information as to what the mean IQ is in the general population? Is it 100 also? I'm assuming it would be very close but would almost certainly not be exactly 100.

At the point of norming, it would be. The process involves fitting all the raw scores of the norming sample neatly into the bell curve, with M = 100 and S.D. = 15. That said, there is a fair bit of debate over whether something like a mean IQ score is even meaningful (pun not intended), given that IQ is not a ratio measure (e.g., the difference between IQ scores of 105 and 100 isn't necessarily the same – in real terms – as the difference between 65 and 70, even though the difference in numeric terms is, so averaging across scores is problematic; though, this doesn't stop the majority of researchers in the field doing it anyway).
 
Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

While dogwatch and arkangel raise interesting points about the IQ scale that is artificially manipulated to give an effect.


Does anyone seriously believe that Stephen Hawking is only 4 times as smart as the dumbest person on the planet (perhaps a member of the Collingwood cheer squad.)

There are no real criteria by which to measure the level of "smartness". That's partially why the IQ test was invented. But to flip your point, would it be fair to say that someone who is completely non-responsive and unable to take care of their most basic needs would only be 4/7ths as intelligent as a member of the Collingwood cheer squad (to use your example), though the former may score 40 (i.e., the zero point) on an IQ test and the latter 70? I understand your point of a skewed distribution leading to a different mean and median, but it could work either way, and I don't think there's any definitive evidence in this regard (if you do have some though, I'd love to steal your ideas and publish them in Science).
 
Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

IMO, eade has not got the best out of the talent in our team - unless we win a flag with this group, its a FAIL if you ask me !!! ... any money eade doesnt tag Judd again today, which will be setting us up for a loss yet agan today !! this is one of the major factors why we have lost to these scum in the last few years, so do something about it for once eade !

Touching briefly on the IQ issue again (bear with me folks) I have little doubt that Eade is one of the most intelligent coaches in the league. You can tell that during interviews.

But time and time again we see dumb things happening, like failing to tag Judd or letting the likes of Goddard and Hodge run as a loose man across half back. Or not insisting forwards are made accountable (eg by dropping them if they fail to exert pressure week after week).

Numerous posters have also noted that Eade has been "outcoached" in our losses. In some of those games I'd have to agree.

I can understand it may be worth trying these tactics once or even twice but if they fail and repeatedly cause us grief, why persist? Why would a clever bloke like Eade do that?

Which leads me to wonder (in Rocket's own terminology) is he the dumbest smart coach in the AFL?
 
Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

See below the 9 types of intelligence. I believe that the IQ test generally measures only types 3, 7 and 9.
3. Logical-Mathematical Intelligence (Number/Reasoning Smart)
7. Linguistic Intelligence (Word Smart)
9. Spatial Intelligence (“Picture Smart”)
I think that a coach needs all of these types of intelligences:
1. Naturalist Intelligence (Nature Smart)
To be able to finely judge a player's ability.
3. Logical-Mathematical Intelligence (Number/Reasoning Smart)
To consider propositions and hypotheses. To perceive relationships and connections and to use abstract, symbolic thought; sequential reasoning skills; and inductive and deductive thinking patterns. To consider strategies and work out plans.
5. Interpersonal Intelligence (People Smart)
To understand and interact effectively with players and the media.
7. Linguistic Intelligence (Word Smart)
To use language to express and appreciate complex meanings.
8. Intra-personal Intelligence (Self Smart)
For self-motivation.
9. Spatial Intelligence (“Picture Smart)
To think up new ideas and be able to formulate a plan to make them work.

I think that Eade has the People Smarts but is lacking in the Logical Smarts. This is why he still plays Stack and other non-performers and out-of-formers and will next week re-introduce Acker or Eagleton.

Logically you want your best team for the grand final. Acker and Eagleton will decline in skills over the next 9 weeks as they age and there is a high probability that they will become injured with a hammy of calf. Players such as Everitt or Hooper will improve over the next 9 weeks and are not likely to become injured. Also they will be more likely to see out a hard-fought game.

Trouble is that Eade should have been including these players weeks ago so that they would now have an extra 4 to 5 games under their belt.

But the footy gods may do it for us anyway. Praise the gods today.




The Nine Types of Intelligence

By Howard Gardner​

1. Naturalist Intelligence (“Nature Smart”)
Designates the human ability to discriminate among living things (plants, animals) as well as sensitivity to other features of the natural world (clouds, rock configurations). This ability was clearly of value in our evolutionary past as hunters, gatherers, and farmers; it continues to be central in such roles as botanist or chef. It is also speculated that much of our consumer society exploits the naturalist intelligences, which can be mobilized in the discrimination among cars, sneakers, kinds of makeup, and the like.

2. Musical Intelligence (“Musical Smart”)
Musical intelligence is the capacity to discern pitch, rhythm, timbre, and tone. This intelligence enables us to recognize, create, reproduce, and reflect on music, as demonstrated by composers, conductors, musicians, vocalist, and sensitive listeners. Interestingly, there is often an affective connection between music and the emotions; and mathematical and musical intelligences may share common thinking processes. Young adults with this kind of intelligence are usually singing or drumming to themselves. They are usually quite aware of sounds others may miss.

3. Logical-Mathematical Intelligence (Number/Reasoning Smart)
Logical-mathematical intelligence is the ability to calculate, quantify, consider propositions and hypotheses, and carry out complete mathematical operations. It enables us to perceive relationships and connections and to use abstract, symbolic thought; sequential reasoning skills; and inductive and deductive thinking patterns. Logical intelligence is usually well developed in mathematicians, scientists, and detectives. Young adults with lots of logical intelligence are interested in patterns, categories, and relationships. They are drawn to arithmetic problems, strategy games and experiments.

4. Existential Intelligence
Sensitivity and capacity to tackle deep questions about human existence, such as the meaning of life, why do we die, and how did we get here.

5. Interpersonal Intelligence (People Smart”)
Interpersonal intelligence is the ability to understand and interact effectively with others. It involves effective verbal and nonverbal communication, the ability to note distinctions among others, sensitivity to the moods and temperaments of others, and the ability to entertain multiple perspectives. Teachers, social workers, actors, and politicians all exhibit interpersonal intelligence. Young adults with this kind of intelligence are leaders among their peers, are good at communicating, and seem to understand others’ feelings and motives.

6. Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence (“Body Smart”)
Bodily kinesthetic intelligence is the capacity to manipulate objects and use a variety of physical skills. This intelligence also involves a sense of timing and the perfection of skills through mind–body union. Athletes, dancers, surgeons, and craftspeople exhibit well-developed bodily kinesthetic intelligence.

7. Linguistic Intelligence (Word Smart)
Linguistic intelligence is the ability to think in words and to use language to express and appreciate complex meanings. Linguistic intelligence allows us to understand the order and meaning of words and to apply meta-linguistic skills to reflect on our use of language. Linguistic intelligence is the most widely shared human competence and is evident in poets, novelists, journalists, and effective public speakers. Young adults with this kind of intelligence enjoy writing, reading, telling stories or doing crossword puzzles.

8. Intra-personal Intelligence (Self Smart”)
Intra-personal intelligence is the capacity to understand oneself and one’s thoughts and feelings, and to use such knowledge in planning and directioning one’s life. Intra-personal intelligence involves not only an appreciation of the self, but also of the human condition. It is evident in psychologist, spiritual leaders, and philosophers. These young adults may be shy. They are very aware of their own feelings and are self-motivated.

9. Spatial Intelligence (“Picture Smart”)
Spatial intelligence is the ability to think in three dimensions. Core capacities include mental imagery, spatial reasoning, image manipulation, graphic and artistic skills, and an active imagination. Sailors, pilots, sculptors, painters, and architects all exhibit spatial intelligence. Young adults with this kind of intelligence may be fascinated with mazes or jigsaw puzzles, or spend free time drawing or daydreaming.
 
Re: Eade is coaching like an amatuer

If you think of intelligence in terms of IQ scores, for the most widely used tests (the Wechsler series), there is a floor at 40 and a ceiling at 160 IQ points, and they are normed so that exactly half of the population sits above and below a score of 100 (though, some time after norming, you would most likely find that a majority of the population will have scores greater than the "average" of 100, due to the rise in IQ scores over time known as the Flynn Effect).

The problem with the method in th Wechsler series is the normalisation of results.

It is designed to show mediocrity is the norm and prevents the elite from impacting the average.

I am fairly certain Don Bradman would have been peeved to have a cap put on his scores to calculate his average.

Incidentally Bradman had 29 scores above his average in 70 completed innings. I don't readily have the actual number of times he batted. But some of his centuries where not outs.

But that shows he was below average (for him) on at least 42 of the 70 occasions when he was dismissed.
Therefore for the majority of the time he performed below average.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top