[gwnn]

helene_t: normally the probabilities don't sum up to 1, did you take that into account? Like 'who will win the coin toss?' will have something like 1.9-1.9.

[helene_t]

what do you refer to, Csaba? The betfair odds are odds, not inverse probabilities.

[billw55]

 Fluffy, on 2014-June-12, 01:07, said:

I would bet Brazil/Spain/Germany for sure, I think it is only 49% because there is a pretty high chance Spain meets Brazil right after groups.

I noticed that afterward. It worries me somewhat. Well, it's only a silly bet.

 mike777, on 2014-June-12, 03:50, said:

One simple example is machine made contact lenses which improves vision greater than 20/20 average vision. Vision is very important in the world cup.
At some point will machine made legs be legal, machine made hips, machine made knees in world cup?

Seems difficult, unless the contact lenses can zoom in somehow. Focus and resolution are not the same thing.

[MickyB]

 helene_t, on 2014-June-12, 02:51, said:

The probability is actually 55% with Brasil, Spain and Germany having odds 1/3, 1/5 and 2/13. Maybe Micky read Germany's odds as 1/13 instead of 2/13. Or maybe the odds have changed in the meantime.

I used the midpoint from the Betfair exchange, using the sportsbook odds will overestimate the probability due to Betfair's mark-up.

[mike777]

[quote name='billw55' timestamp='1402582769' post='797983']
I noticed that afterward. It worries me somewhat. Well, it's only a silly bet.


Seems difficult, unless the contact lenses can zoom in somehow. Focus and resolution are not the same thing.
[/quote


I don't know



but I expect machines and their owners to focus on what pays]


Which is my main point
The melding of man and machine

[chasetb]

Well, since I know we have at least 5 different WC countries that have posted here, I think we need to start talking about the games. Tomorrow, I expect Germany to beat Portugal, and I hope that the Black Stars don't shine at all (Ghana vs USA, their nickname is because of their flag).

[mike777]

I think I mentioned Germany long ago, best talent, best team.
Brazil, most passion, most home field advantage. ( See flop in game one)

[gwnn]

I hope you won't mind the necro but recent football events brought this thread to mind.
{the question was: where do you draw the line between theoretical and real odds?}

 Aberlour10, on 2014-June-12, 04:56, said:

The real life draws the line, the facts of the football.

No one of these teams will be World Champion this time to 99,9% >>> not the mathematical odds but with common sense.

Australia, South Korea, Cameroon, Japan, Nigeria, Iran,, Ghana, Honduras, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Ivory Coast, Algeria, Bosnia, USA, Switzerland...

I dont know what is the addition of their odds but its doesent matter in the real football life.

Leicester City are about to become champions from 2500-1 odds. Sorry I don't want to make a big point out of this, but it's just fun to read The Guardian's preview and the comments under it:
http://www.theguardi...-leicester-city

[Aberlour10]

I think its a bad example to discuss it and to compare nationals teams with league squads. Leicester is like Hoffenheim in Germany. The receipt is simple: you buy the right international players to the right time ( its not easy at all) get a right coach which forms them to the super solid team..etc etc etc...national teams counted in my posting cant do it....

Hoffenheim can happen everywhere in europeans football leagues. Leicester is only another example of it. In 3-4 years nobody will talk about them.

[jjbrr]

lol@aberlour. leicester city is one of the most amazing stories in sports.

[gwnn]

It's not about whether or not we'll talk about them in 3-4 years (I can guarantee you, we will talk about them, but it's anyway irrelevant). It's about whether odds of 2500-1 (or 5000-1 as I have seen before) are merely theoretical or real. Greece 2004 was already brought up but if anything, Leicester are even more amazing as they will have played 38 games by the end of the season so the noise will be much less.

[Zelandakh]

Hoffenheim are a bad example to use as a comparison for Leicester. LFC are a traditional yo-yo club whereas TSG99H are "new money". One might think to compare LFC in Germany with FCN or Lautern but both of those have been far more successful, so a better comparison is probably Fortuna Düsseldorf. What odds would you have given on them winning the BL a few seasons back after their good start? That is roughly the equivalent of what LFC are close to achieving this year.

[Aberlour10]

 Zelandakh, on 2016-April-15, 09:42, said:

Hoffenheim are a bad example to use as a comparison for Leicester. LFC are a traditional yo-yo club whereas TSG99H are "new money". One might think to compare LFC in Germany with FCN or Lautern but both of those have been far more successful, so a better comparison is probably Fortuna Düsseldorf. What odds would you have given on them winning the BL a few seasons back after their good start? That is roughly the equivalent of what LFC are close to achieving this year.

All these comparsions fail because english teams with low standings( like Leicester before ) have by far better financial possibilities as the german with the same standings. The spread between german and english tv money is enormous

[Aberlour10]

 jjbrr, on 2016-April-15, 09:04, said:

lol@aberlour. leicester city is one of the most amazing stories in sports.

Uncounted stories about the "comets" in sports. we will see and dig out this thread in 3-4 years.

[gwnn]

Of course I am not saying Leicester are going to win four championships in a row (unless some of them are literally the Championship ). I was just saying that even things with incredibly low probabilities still happen. With incredibly low frequency. You can't just say "only the Big Four can you win the Premiership." People were saying Leicester was one of the most likely teams to relegate! Do you finally understand what I was saying?

[jjbrr]

 Aberlour10, on 2016-April-15, 12:16, said:

Uncounted stories about the "comets" in sports. we will see and dig out this thread in 3-4 years.

you're missing the point completely, and apparently at the same time missing something awesome. have an open mind.

[Fluffy]

Obviously premier league is funnier, not like spannish Liga where only the 2 millionaries who fight to get more power from authorities getting the best arbitration again and again win everytime.

[jjbrr]

[Cyberyeti]

 Fluffy, on 2016-April-17, 16:19, said:

Obviously premier league is funnier, not like spannish Liga where only the 2 millionaries who fight to get more power from authorities getting the best arbitration again and again win everytime.

Yeah, this is the equivalent of Getafe or Eibar winning la liga.

Now we'll see if Gary Lineker (who was a Leicester legend before he went on to Everton, Barcelona and Spurs) makes good on his somewhat rash promise to present the first highlights show or the new season in his underpants if Leicester won.

[mike777]

And yet this thread still does not demand the destruction of Fifa except by me.


Clearly the fans who support Fifa with their money do not demand its destruction. They allow the criminals to continue. They just do not care that much! It is up to the fans to destroy or allow Fifa to continue.

--------


As who or what should replace FiFa....let the free market decide...let millions upon tens of millions decide... that is the free market; perhaps one something or ten somethings replace Fifa

not a King ...not you.