- Thread starter
- #31
Ok, so your answer is no.
It was your idea to set up this thread knowing exactly what the outcome will be. Then you try to put down my argument by saying that 'any theory that cannot be proved wrong is useless'. But then you personally will refuse to accept that 'a theory' can be proved right. I sense a little hypocrisy in your stance
So you can't prove the model wrong and I can't prove the model right. Again we go round and round in circles.
Eh?
Your argument, as I understand it, is that the model provides an objective measure of how good teams really are that is seperate from the measurement provided by the league table. My argument all along is that there is no such objective measurement and that the only objective measurement there is is the league table.
If all the model can do, at its theoretical best, is to mirror the league table how then does it provide an objective measurement of how good teams are seperate from the league table?
Anyway, I thought you were of the view that the whole "seeing if the model can predict results better than the rest of us" was pointless as it would not prove anything either way. Are you now accepting that if the predictions based on it are no better than average than that proves it wrong? Surely that must follow if you are arguing that if the predictions are better than average than then proves it right.
And its not just that I can't prove the your interetation of the model wrong, it is a fact that, because of the way you define your terms, it is impossible for anyone to prove it wrong which renders it useless for the purposes that you want to use it for.
