Turn Off Ads?
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 49 of 49

Thread: The Nats are Irrelevant

  1. #46
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,478

    Re: The Nats are Irrelevant

    Quote Originally Posted by redssince75 View Post
    Well if you want to just play the games on paper, there was only a 12.5% chance the Giants would take 3 in a row from us last year (.5 x .5 x .5). Or even < 12.5% if you factor in "home field advantage". Yet it happened.

    They don't play the games on paper. I'll wait for my chickens to hatch before counting them. And any other applicable cliches.
    That's not how percentages work.

    That the Giants came back and won three games with a 12.5% chance doesn't make the percentages wrong. What it means is that only 12 times out of 100 will it happen. That just happened to be one of the 12.

    In this case, yes, four times out of 100 the Nationals would come back. But 96 times, they won't.

    If you had to put money down, which side would you put it on?
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #47
    Viva la Rolen kaldaniels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    7,810

    Re: The Nats are Irrelevant

    Quote Originally Posted by redssince75 View Post
    Well if you want to just play the games on paper, there was only a 12.5% chance the Giants would take 3 in a row from us last year (.5 x .5 x .5). Or even < 12.5% if you factor in "home field advantage". Yet it happened.

    They don't play the games on paper. I'll wait for my chickens to hatch before counting them. And any other applicable cliches.
    Fair enough.

    I'm looking at a dozen eggs.

    12 chickens for sale!

  4. Likes:

    Brutus (09-18-2013)

  5. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    675

    Re: The Nats are Irrelevant

    Quote Originally Posted by Brutus View Post
    That's not how percentages work.

    That the Giants came back and won three games with a 12.5% chance doesn't make the percentages wrong. What it means is that only 12 times out of 100 will it happen. That just happened to be one of the 12.

    In this case, yes, four times out of 100 the Nationals would come back. But 96 times, they won't.

    If you had to put money down, which side would you put it on?
    As an objective bettor, money goes on the Reds. As a Reds fan, I'm biting my freaking nails, due to Murphy's Law.

  6. #49
    Member NebraskaRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Lincoln, NE
    Posts
    1,320

    Re: The Nats are Irrelevant

    I am 5% worried.

  7. Likes:

    Brutus (09-18-2013), M2 (09-18-2013)


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25