All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?
Sir you must be a rocket scientist or something of that ilk , a true genius, I am just blown away with your intellectual know how !Like winning the lottery it's 50/50, you either do or you don't
That’s absolutely correct. But before the draw, it’s 1/64.
Too easy, unless we are drawn first each time
Your hand will "more naturally" select the tennis ball than the pea. You'd have to rattle around in the bag to "find" the pea
)
I'm making a much simpler point. Put an even number of balls in a bag, bowl or box. Take them out of the bag, bowl, box one at a time. Call the first one out Home, the second Away, etc. The chance of any single ball being Home or Away is likely to be very very close to being evens, 50%, a half. But it is virtually impossible to design a PERFECTLY random process, coin toss, dice, balls whatever. Because the dice, coin, balls will not be exactly uniform. There will be a bias.That would only matter if you put the same team on the same number and put the same number on the same ball in every draw and used the same balls for every draw (and given the minuscule differences, it would have to be thousands or even millions of draws to make a difference).
Back in reality.. different balls are used and different teams are assigned to different numbers in different draws. That in itself is not random, but it does negate any size/weight/etc difference across draws, because the person making the draw cannot know which team is which from year to year (one year we'll be the pea, and the next a tennis ball).
Unless you're suggesting a conspiracy? Which I'd be fully on board with if we'd got away so many consecutive away draws
Yes. You're right (in my view). But, (repeating) I've got two Degrees in Statistics, why would I be remotely interested in so called "practical purposes" (winking smiley face thing). I've not come on this forum, where I run a parody football firm, for anything in the same County as "practical".
I've forgotten more than I ever knew. I was very much an Applied Statistician. And increasingly in my "job" became a Social Statistician (as in not an Economic Statistician). But, I do think you're right. Given the difficulties of designing something truly random, you have to have something which for all practical purposes is as close to random as you can get. Computerised Random Number generation algorithms are often used in "modern life"
There’s a 50/50 chance one of your degrees were wrong
Erm, statistically int one degree in statistics good enough?
I have a reputation for telling tall tales. I studied in a building opposite the Old Queen's Head "in Pond St". I had a disagreement with a lecturer about a Standard Deviation interpretation. He threatened to throw me out of the third floor window. He was a wrestler in his spare time. It was a Polytechnic. That is all true. Great times......There’s a 50/50 chance one of your degrees were wrong
Erm, statistically int one degree in statistics good enough?
I went ‘t same college, Adsets building. I was on next to the top floor doing HND in mechanical engineering. Around 1975.
Sheffield City Polytechnic. But, I was in Heriot House. The Old Queen's Head was literally 20 yards across the street. (I think it's now called Aspect House)
Was that the computer card section?
I get that size, weight, texture, temperature, etc of the balls and the influencing factors of the people picking the home and away teams will effect, to a degree, which ball is picked. But if the ball numbers are allocated to the clubs truly randomly before each and every draw then the odds will be back to evens for a club to be allocated away or at home on every draw?
OK. Run me through the perfectly random process of allocating ball numbers to clubs mate. You know, given the essentially impossible task of designing perfectly random processes.
That does create a new challenge. But it does eliminate all the issues you raised. Using the exact time the previous tie finished to chronologically number the teams could be an option?
Good idea. How are you measuring exact time, exactly? First peep of the whistle? Last peep? Perfection & exactness are the issues here. The difficulty is in order to get around the "fact" that drawing balls out of a bag is not perfectly random, you layer on more & more slightly inexact & slightly imperfect processes.
That's why he took two, so statistically, he'd pass one of themThere’s a 50/50 chance one of your degrees were wrong
Erm, statistically int one degree in statistics good enough?
All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?
