Certified Legendary Thread The Squiggle is back in 2023 (and other analytics)

[The King!]

so we just needs to play Carlton every week basically

 

[iluvparis]

The complete collapse of the Melbourne squiggle line this year is absolutely glorious

 

[Final Siren]

I’m not interested in overall, just winning a round or two (or more) in a 50-80 person comp.

I’ve decided on the following approach, based on differences between odds and tipping proportion.

This is an example using round 1 2019 data. Games in order eg tiges first. Proportion is % tipped divided by % chance per odds.

View attachment 633604

Interested in any feedback.

I want an update on this! I reckon you must be leading your tipping comp by about 5 and have won at least two rounds.

 

[flamingEMBERS]

Final Siren chance you can change the Eagle blue to Royal instead of Navy

 

[Suma Magic]

I want an update on this! I reckon you must be leading your tipping comp by about 5 and have won at least two rounds.

Haha round 1 I tipped the first six. I then decided to “play defence” and switch to favourites. But it didn’t save and I ended up on 6. Would have got 8 if it had saved. Someone else got 7...

Last week I got 6, someone else got 7.

This week I got 3...

Some mad dog is on 19 and leading my comp...

 

[Roobs321]

On the 2018 premiers thing, the Eagles were certainly close to the pack in real squiggle terms. But differently to the Bulldogs and Tigers, they were a champion-style team for most of the season, not dishing out many floggings, edging many of their opponents with a sprinkling of away wins. They felt very traditional.

They were good enough to win the flag, but it didn't really feel like a case of "coming good" to me, like it was with the Bulldogs and Tigers, who simply turned up to play and bulldozed their way through. I don't think you can really compare the two. West Coast have more in common with Sydney 2012 for mine. They basically kept the level they brought to the season.

 

[iluvparis]

On the 2018 premiers thing, the Eagles were certainly close to the pack in real squiggle terms. But differently to the Bulldogs and Tigers, they were a champion-style team for most of the season, not dishing out many floggings, edging many of their opponents with a sprinkling of away wins. They felt very traditional.

They were good enough to win the flag, but it didn't really feel like a case of "coming good" to me, like it was with the Bulldogs and Tigers, who simply turned up to play and bulldozed their way through. I don't think you can really compare the two. West Coast have more in common with Sydney 2012 for mine. They basically kept the level they brought to the season.

Most champion-style teams dish out plenty of floggings.

 

[Final Siren]

On the 2018 premiers thing, the Eagles were certainly close to the pack in real squiggle terms. But differently to the Bulldogs and Tigers, they were a champion-style team for most of the season, not dishing out many floggings, edging many of their opponents with a sprinkling of away wins. They felt very traditional.

They were good enough to win the flag, but it didn't really feel like a case of "coming good" to me, like it was with the Bulldogs and Tigers, who simply turned up to play and bulldozed their way through. I don't think you can really compare the two. West Coast have more in common with Sydney 2012 for mine. They basically kept the level they brought to the season.

Squiggle generally won't rate a team that does "just enough" to win games, because most of the time, that turns out to be an average team getting a fortunate run of results. I haven't seen statistical evidence for the idea of a team that "coasts" to wins, for example -- instead, top teams really do belt bad teams, even when they don't need to.

Squiggle rated West Coast as pretty mediocre after Round 19, 2018, when they could only manage 41 points in losing to North Melbourne, and after that they rose fairly strongly. But I agree that the late surge wasn't nearly as dramatic as the Tigers and Bulldogs in the two previous years, who were more surprising premiers.

 

[telsor]

Squiggle doesn’t rate Hawthorn beating north. Who knows what losing would have done

Nobody rates beating North. It's like beating Carlton. Just something you do and hope you avoid injuries in the process.

 

[Pessimistic]

Nobody rates beating North. It's like beating Carlton. Just something you do and hope you avoid injuries in the process.

Hawks lost a projected win over the weekend - so lucky they banked this win

I think its because the teams they play twice (eagles, Cats, Brisbane, Port Sydney) had a good weekend

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

Squiggle generally won't rate a team that does "just enough" to win games, because most of the time, that turns out to be an average team getting a fortunate run of results. I haven't seen statistical evidence for the idea of a team that "coasts" to wins, for example -- instead, top teams really do belt bad teams, even when they don't need to.

Squiggle rated West Coast as pretty mediocre after Round 19, 2018, when they could only manage 41 points in losing to North Melbourne, and after that they rose fairly strongly. But I agree that the late surge wasn't nearly as dramatic as the Tigers and Bulldogs in the two previous years, who were more surprising premiers.

I'm curious about this, as my team (Hawthorn) spent most of their dominant period "coasting" to wins (and even losses) during the H&A season.

Indeed it was a relatively common point of difference raised between Hawthorn and Geelong fans - Cats going at 100% always (more wins, more %), Hawks always keeping something in reserve (when it matters)....

Or are you suggesting Hawthorn fans were delusional and they really weren't better in finals than H&A during that period (say 2012-2014, with 15/16 being "one" last shot)

 

[Mantastic]

I'm curious about this, as my team (Hawthorn) spent most of their dominant period "coasting" to wins (and even losses) during the H&A season.

Indeed it was a relatively common point of difference raised between Hawthorn and Geelong fans - Cats going at 100% always (more wins, more %), Hawks always keeping something in reserve (when it matters)....

Or are you suggesting Hawthorn fans were delusional and they really weren't better in finals than H&A during that period (say 2012-2014, with 15/16 being "one" last shot)

Hawthorn's lowest percentage in their 4 Grand Final years was 135%, with two years up around 155%. They clearly did well in the H&A.

 

[Max zero]

Eagles dropped off a little through the middle of the year, pretty sure you were a game clear on top at one stage but then we finished up 2 games clear. Other models differed a bit but Squiggle has us a mile ahead for most of the year while WC floated amongst 7-8 other contenders.

WC then undeniably played the best footy in September and thats why they won the flag, much like Richmond 2017 and WB 2016.

We did have a drop off when Kennedy, Darling and Lecras were all out injured at the same time in the middle of the year.

 

[telsor]

Hawks lost a projected win over the weekend - so lucky they banked this win

I think its because the teams they play twice (eagles, Cats, Brisbane, Port Sydney) had a good weekend

Nah, more that if you're expected to beat a team by 40pts, and you only beat them by 20, most AIs would view that as a poor performance.

 

[kaiserchief13]

Squiggle generally won't rate a team that does "just enough" to win games, because most of the time, that turns out to be an average team getting a fortunate run of results. I haven't seen statistical evidence for the idea of a team that "coasts" to wins, for example -- instead, top teams really do belt bad teams, even when they don't need to.

Squiggle rated West Coast as pretty mediocre after Round 19, 2018, when they could only manage 41 points in losing to North Melbourne, and after that they rose fairly strongly. But I agree that the late surge wasn't nearly as dramatic as the Tigers and Bulldogs in the two previous years, who were more surprising premiers.

Does squiggle factor in playing at suburban grounds I.e. Canberra Hobart Launceston and Geelong?

 

[Roobs321]

That North Melbourne loss was our worst of the season (following a flat trot), but a lot of premiers have a comparable loss and more workmanlike period of the season.

 

[iluvparis]

Does squiggle factor in playing at suburban grounds I.e. Canberra Hobart Launceston and Geelong?

From memory I think only state matters - so Hobart and Launceston are treated the same.

 

[Hobbes]

From memory I think only state matters - so Hobart and Launceston are treated the same.

From my memory, only the home venue of the team matters. Hawthorn versus some Victorian club in Launceston would be treated as a neutral game.

Geelong is treated as another state. Geelong home games played in Melbourne are treated as Geelong home games.


(My algorithm treats Geelong and Melbourne as the same. I remove home ground advantage for games in oddball locations like Darwin or China. I don't treat Tasmania or Canberra differently to any other home game.)

 

[Viceregal]

From my memory, only the home venue of the team matters. Hawthorn versus some Victorian club in Launceston would be treated as a neutral game.

Geelong is treated as another state. Geelong home games played in Melbourne are treated as Geelong home games.


(My algorithm treats Geelong and Melbourne as the same. I remove home ground advantage for games in oddball locations like Darwin or China. I don't treat Tasmania or Canberra differently to any other home game.)

iirc the Lions are considered a Victorian side when it comes to the number of Victorian sides having to play in Tassie ... how do you and squiggle process it?

 

[Hobbes]

iirc the Lions are considered a Victorian side when it comes to the number of Victorian sides having to play in Tassie ... how do you and squiggle process it?

As far as I'm concerned, they're a Queensland team. I think the Squiggle works the same.

 

[Viceregal]

Looking at the forecast home and away rounds it looks like Lions beat Pies in R5, Swans in R7, Freo in R10, Blues in R12 but in each one we are credited with a lost game ... how does that work / what does that represent?

 

[Hobbes]

Looking at the forecast home and away rounds it looks like Lions beat Pies in R5, Swans in R7, Freo in R10, Blues in R12 but in each one we are credited with a lost game ... how does that work / what does that represent?

The ladder is probablistic - while it may forecast a win, the ladder will only be credited with 0.6 wins, which may or may not cause a win to be added on the ladder.

 

[Viceregal]

The ladder is probablistic - while it may forecast a win, the ladder will only be credited with 0.6 wins, which may or may not cause a win to be added on the ladder.

So hypothetically if your partials were high enough you could both win and lose the same game in terms of the WL column on the ladder there? (I am assuming that if the forecast win still added partial loss value five times that it would also be adding partial win value .... ok looked for that and yep in the last round we are beaten by the Tigers and get a plus on our win column!)

 

[flamingEMBERS]

Grand Final Preview this week, Geelong v GWS. I wonder how many Squiggle GF previews we’ll get throughout the season.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[iluvparis]

So hypothetically if your partials were high enough you could both win and lose the same game in terms of the WL column on the ladder there? (I am assuming that if the forecast win still added partial loss value five times that it would also be adding partial win value .... ok looked for that and yep in the last round we are beaten by the Tigers and get a plus on our win column!)

Yup