Ram Posted February 11, 2011 Posted February 11, 2011 If the goal is to laugh at me to revenge all that I have done to you, why wait till I post the numbers :hysterical: And don't forget, most folks realize that those numbers won't be accurate so what you be laughing at. And by chance, if those numbers are close or even if the result is like what I said then you are going to look like a fool. It's you who has everything to lose here :P There's no 'most' here. In fact, there’s a not a SINGLE person who thinks this is even a reasonable question. So please, speak for yourself. :hysterical: And again, you’re going to fool nobody if your ‘prediction’ with whatever crap methodology that you’re going to spend hours working on (:haha:), is going to be ‘India to score around 290, If we bat first..’. Trust me, even a 2 year can tell as much, without, I might add, the help of all the useless work you’re going to put in. :hysterical:
Ram Posted February 11, 2011 Posted February 11, 2011 *Rett marks his calender as well in anticipation of someone waiting to laugh at some piece of stats as if they were suppose to make sense in the first place. How hilarious would that be* OMG, how did i miss this in the first place?! So you’re conceding that your ‘calculations’ wont make sense when you ‘publish’ them (what a great day, that would be!), but if by sheer fluke they turn out to be correct, then you wont hesitate take credit for them. :hysterical:
zen Posted February 11, 2011 Author Posted February 11, 2011 There's no 'most' here. In fact, there’s a not a SINGLE person who thinks this is even a reasonable question. So please, speak for yourself. :hysterical: And again, you’re going to fool nobody if your ‘prediction’ with whatever crap methodology that you’re going to spend hours working on (:haha:), is going to be ‘India to score around 290, If we bat first..’. Trust me, even a 2 year can tell as much, without, I might add, the help of all the useless work you’re going to put in. :hysterical: See with assumptions like that^, it's easy to see why you keep getting pawned and have to look to seek revenge :hysterical:
zen Posted February 11, 2011 Author Posted February 11, 2011 OMG' date= how did i miss this in the first place?! So you’re conceding that your ‘calculations’ wont make sense when you ‘publish’ them (what a great day, that would be!), but if by sheer fluke they turn out to be correct, then you wont hesitate take credit for them. :hysterical: Is that a surprise! you have missed it all :giggle: PAWNED again
Ram Posted February 11, 2011 Posted February 11, 2011 Even an astrologer’s parrot has a one-in-two chance of accurately predicting who the winner of a match is going to be. So what, we believe whatever the parrot says.? Its good to know that the dude-who-refers-to-himself-in-the-third-person is now completely banking on nothing but sheer luck, for the scores to match his ‘prediction’ so that he can come back later and say ‘See, I told ya..’. :hysterical:
Ram Posted February 11, 2011 Posted February 11, 2011 Is that a surprise! you have missed it all :giggle: PAWNED again No no my dear fella. I like your persistence, but sometimes, brevity is more useful than feigned valor. See, you should have realized a looooooooong time ago (in fact, I know you have realized already) that this was a VERYYYY bad idea and its better to say ‘My bad.. wrong move..’ and just move on. But hey, that’s just not a possibility right? :winky:
zen Posted February 11, 2011 Author Posted February 11, 2011 Even an astrologer’s parrot has a one-in-two chance of accurately predicting who the winner of a match is going to be. So what, we believe whatever the parrot says.? Its good to know that the dude-who-refers-to-himself-in-the-third-person is now completely banking on nothing but sheer luck, for the scores to match his ‘prediction’ so that he can come back later and say ‘See, I told ya..’. :hysterical: Therefore it's foolish to challenge someone who has 50% chance of being successful (as if he is has a 99% chance of failing) w/ option of predicting any/all game he wishes to and that too when Ind is playing Eng and WI :--D You have got pawend so many times that this is not even funny or exciting for me (like it's for you who has been unsuccessful so many times before). Go look for another opportunity to get back to me. Every dog has his day, so one day you will too, don't worry kid :hysterical:
Ram Posted February 11, 2011 Posted February 11, 2011 Therefore it's foolish to challenge someone who has 50% chance of being successful w/ option of predicting any/all game he wishes to and that too when Ind is playing Eng and WI :--D You have got pawend so many times that this is not even funny or exciting for me (like it's for you who has been unsuccessful so many times before). Go look for another opportunity to get back to me. Every dog has his day, so one day you will too, don't worry kid :hysterical: That’s just a random collection of words that doesn’t actually mean anything right? :hysterical: Anyways, see you before 27th feb! :nice:
Sachinism Posted February 11, 2011 Posted February 11, 2011 You guys really know how to drag an issue
zen Posted February 11, 2011 Author Posted February 11, 2011 That’s just a random collection of words that doesn’t actually mean anything right? :hysterical: Anyways, see you before 27th feb! :nice: Another assumption! I haven't even decided which game(s), I will predict for :giggle: Keep checking to see my prediction(s) :P
Raghav_12 Posted February 11, 2011 Posted February 11, 2011 ^^ Please publish your detailed methodology as well, not only numbers. I don't want random function to be invoked in excel sheet :-)
zen Posted February 11, 2011 Author Posted February 11, 2011 ^^ Please publish your detailed methodology as well' date=' not only numbers. I don't want [i']random function to be invoked in excel sheet :-) what else do you want? :giggle:
coffee_rules Posted February 11, 2011 Posted February 11, 2011 How do I predict the average for single matches..it will be either infinty (n.o) or same as the score. You want us to predict the average for all 3 matches or for individual matches.
Raghav_12 Posted February 11, 2011 Posted February 11, 2011 what else do you want? :giggle: Well I don't think that's a unreasonable request. Do you? Everybody going through numbers, that you'l be publishing, will have a right to know how those were arrived at.
zen Posted February 11, 2011 Author Posted February 11, 2011 How do I predict the average for single matches..it will be either infinty (n.o) or same as the score. You want us to predict the average for all 3 matches or for individual matches. You have to predict the score and thus result. You can do that by doing whatever methology you want. Only thing is, it shouldn't be a random prediction, there should be some methodology It's up to you what you want to predict for. You culd pick your game or predict for all three. There are no hard and fast rules.
zen Posted February 11, 2011 Author Posted February 11, 2011 Well I don't think that's a unreasonable request. Do you? Everybody going through numbers that you'l be publishing will have a right to know how those were are arrived at. But you refused to take the challenge (citing it as an idiotic excercise) so what right does it give you to ask? I am doing this because I started the thread and no one would take the challenge. And that too despite not being a good mathmatician :winky:
Raghav_12 Posted February 11, 2011 Posted February 11, 2011 But you refused to take the challenge (citing it as an idiotic excercise) so what right does it give you to ask? I am doing this because I started the thread and no one would take the challenge. And that too despite not being a good mathmatician :winky: Lolz.. If I had taken the challenge then why I would have asked YOU to publish methodology? Then I would have published that methodology myself. I don't think, it is that diffuclt logic. Anyways, I was just trying to impress that your numbers should be backed up by credible explanations. At least you'll avoid few laughs for your effort.
zen Posted February 11, 2011 Author Posted February 11, 2011 Lolz.. If I had taken the challenge then why I would have asked YOU to publish methodology? Then I would have published that methodology myself. I don't think, it is that diffuclt logic. Anyways, I was just trying to impress that your numbers should be backed up by credible explanations. At least you'll avoid few laughs for your effort. This logic doesn't work in your case as you dismissed the challenge. :winky: And what right does those who dismissed the challenge have to laugh at those who have taken it? Only those who take the challenge can "morally" laugh at others' numbers .... Anyone who at least attempts "the challenege" is probably laughing at those who "chickned" out :--D Enough said!
Ram Posted February 11, 2011 Posted February 11, 2011 This logic doesn't work in your case as you dismissed the challenge. :winky: And what right does those who dismissed the challenge have to laugh at those who have taken it? Only those who take the challenge can "morally" laugh at others' numbers .... Anyone who at least attempts "the challenege" is probably laughing at those who "chickned" out :--D Enough said! Lulz, that’s some of the weirdest piece of convoluted logic I have listened to, in my life. Especially this line – ‘Only those who take the challenge can "morally" laugh at others' numbers’. What in the God's green earth, is that supposed to mean! :hysterical:
yoda Posted February 11, 2011 Posted February 11, 2011 OP does have an interesting point. Like Outsider has mentioned, all of the core stats are available via StatsGuru. Now take those stats, make assumptions on who your playing XI will be, (remember having Sree in the lineup vs not, Kohli or no Kohli) and come up with your closest prediction for the runs. After all that whoever gets closest wins. Now, who wants to do all this? Not me. :giggle: Why? Cause it is too painful and boring to do the grunt work, at least for me, however interesting the idea may be. :finger:
Recommended Posts