Warrior General Games

Originally posted by nautilus
I've always appreciated the rankings and predictions. It wasn't just Scranton that thought the predictions were 95% certainty of victory as in indicated in the responses. For me, it doesn't make any difference if we're favored or underdogs but the language in post was misleading.

Brantford over Brisbane (99.9% confidence level)
New England over Canberra (21% confidence level)
Fiji over West Scranton (95 % confidence level)
Emerald City over Newcastle (34% confidence level)

Anyway, Good luck Strike in tomorrows game!

I noticed you left this part off...


* % Confidence level is NOT the same as odds of winning, it is the confidence of the statement. It is the same as the level of confidence you would get from using the three sigma rule on a normal distribution.

Originally posted by lukin83
Originally posted by nautilus

I've always appreciated the rankings and predictions. It wasn't just Scranton that thought the predictions were 95% certainty of victory as in indicated in the responses. For me, it doesn't make any difference if we're favored or underdogs but the language in post was misleading.

Brantford over Brisbane (99.9% confidence level)
New England over Canberra (21% confidence level)
Fiji over West Scranton (95 % confidence level)
Emerald City over Newcastle (34% confidence level)

Anyway, Good luck Strike in tomorrows game!

I noticed you left this part off...


* % Confidence level is NOT the same as odds of winning, it is the confidence of the statement. It is the same as the level of confidence you would get from using the three sigma rule on a normal distribution.

But that would require that readin' thingee them ejumacated folks do. Puttin' words into my eyes makes me sleepy.

Originally posted by pikesju02
Originally posted by Chetro

Originally posted by JoeRedneck


Originally posted by them_camels



lol's champs obv

OH, no doubt, they are the favorites to win it all in Alpha, but I'm not so sure they will be able to stop the Canes or Nites.

Either way best of luck to WS, CS and UC the rest of the way out

Strike is a great team for sure, but I'm a little disappointed that Scranton STILL doesn't get any respect around here.

Should be a great game.

Chetro,

Its not that Scranton isn't getting any respect. I thought you were a good team before you played us, Fiji, but with the way your teammate(s) came on here and acted, the league just doesn't care for your team in general at this point.

I will say that there are some on your team who have proved to be respectable, like yourself, which is why I still know what you are saying. I'm sure your team will gain the respect which you think it deserves, but it would have come a lot faster had those previous events not happened.

Either way, best of luck with your remaining games in the playoffs.

Pike


Thanks Pikes. The thing I think a lot of people overlook though is that a vocal minority don't express how the entire team feels. I'd bet most of the teams in Pro have at least one guy who likes to talk smack and might come off as arrogant. You guys just do a better job of keeping yours off these forums

As a Scranton Invader I'd like to say that the whole prediction makes perfect sense and I'm not upset at all by the 95% thing. It makes logical sense that the prediction would become weak after our boost.
Originally posted by Chetro
Thanks Pikes. The thing I think a lot of people overlook though is that a vocal minority don't express how the entire team feels. I'd bet most of the teams in Pro have at least one guy who likes to talk smack and might come off as arrogant. You guys just do a better job of keeping yours off these forums
+1

Originally posted by JuniorMcSpiffy
Originally posted by lukin83

Originally posted by nautilus


I've always appreciated the rankings and predictions. It wasn't just Scranton that thought the predictions were 95% certainty of victory as in indicated in the responses. For me, it doesn't make any difference if we're favored or underdogs but the language in post was misleading.

Brantford over Brisbane (99.9% confidence level)
New England over Canberra (21% confidence level)
Fiji over West Scranton (95 % confidence level)
Emerald City over Newcastle (34% confidence level)

Anyway, Good luck Strike in tomorrows game!

I noticed you left this part off...


* % Confidence level is NOT the same as odds of winning, it is the confidence of the statement. It is the same as the level of confidence you would get from using the three sigma rule on a normal distribution.

But that would require that readin' thingee them ejumacated folks do. Puttin' words into my eyes makes me sleepy.


whose talking smack now? sore that ur teams out? LMAO

Originally posted by natey
As a Scranton Invader I'd like to say that the whole prediction makes perfect sense and I'm not upset at all by the 95% thing. It makes logical sense that the prediction would become weak after our boost.
Originally posted by Chetro

Thanks Pikes. The thing I think a lot of people overlook though is that a vocal minority don't express how the entire team feels. I'd bet most of the teams in Pro have at least one guy who likes to talk smack and might come off as arrogant. You guys just do a better job of keeping yours off these forums
+1

Not a problem......there's now at least 2 invaders that are ok in my book. Now you just need to smack your bitch up!!!

Originally posted by lukin83
Originally posted by nautilus

I've always appreciated the rankings and predictions. It wasn't just Scranton that thought the predictions were 95% certainty of victory as in indicated in the responses. For me, it doesn't make any difference if we're favored or underdogs but the language in post was misleading.

Brantford over Brisbane (99.9% confidence level)
New England over Canberra (21% confidence level)
Fiji over West Scranton (95 % confidence level)
Emerald City over Newcastle (34% confidence level)

Anyway, Good luck Strike in tomorrows game!

I noticed you left this part off...


* % Confidence level is NOT the same as odds of winning.

Just to rile somebody up, please explain the difference between saying "Fiji has a 95% chance of beating West Scranton" and saying "I am 95% confident that the statement Fiji will beat West Scranton is accurate".

Because, either way you look at it, someone had to be 95% sure that Fiji would win to make that statement, whether you say its confidence in the statement that fiji will win, or just call it odds of winning, either way, it still says the OP was *almost* entirely certain that Fiji would win the game.

I don't care how its intended to be interpreted, it comes off as if the OP felt there was almost no chance West Scranton would win the match, 95% is still 95% in favor and just 5% against, either way you word it...

Originally posted by Chetro
Originally posted by pikesju02

Originally posted by Chetro


Originally posted by JoeRedneck



Originally posted by them_camels




lol's champs obv

OH, no doubt, they are the favorites to win it all in Alpha, but I'm not so sure they will be able to stop the Canes or Nites.

Either way best of luck to WS, CS and UC the rest of the way out

Strike is a great team for sure, but I'm a little disappointed that Scranton STILL doesn't get any respect around here.

Should be a great game.

Chetro,

Its not that Scranton isn't getting any respect. I thought you were a good team before you played us, Fiji, but with the way your teammate(s) came on here and acted, the league just doesn't care for your team in general at this point.

I will say that there are some on your team who have proved to be respectable, like yourself, which is why I still know what you are saying. I'm sure your team will gain the respect which you think it deserves, but it would have come a lot faster had those previous events not happened.

Either way, best of luck with your remaining games in the playoffs.

Pike


Thanks Pikes. The thing I think a lot of people overlook though is that a vocal minority don't express how the entire team feels. I'd bet most of the teams in Pro have at least one guy who likes to talk smack and might come off as arrogant. You guys just do a better job of keeping yours off these forums

One or two I could understand (every team seems to have one or two), but when the majority of the team members that I've seen on this board are constantly spewing crap, that's not quite the same. My ignore list is almost entirely Invaders. It also doesn't help that one of the most obnoxious of the group is the team owner.

There are definitely a couple of you that have been pretty cool all around, but from what I've seen it seems like you guys might actually be the minority.

Originally posted by Vilita
Originally posted by lukin83

Originally posted by nautilus


I've always appreciated the rankings and predictions. It wasn't just Scranton that thought the predictions were 95% certainty of victory as in indicated in the responses. For me, it doesn't make any difference if we're favored or underdogs but the language in post was misleading.

Brantford over Brisbane (99.9% confidence level)
New England over Canberra (21% confidence level)
Fiji over West Scranton (95 % confidence level)
Emerald City over Newcastle (34% confidence level)

Anyway, Good luck Strike in tomorrows game!

I noticed you left this part off...


* % Confidence level is NOT the same as odds of winning.

Just to rile somebody up, please explain the difference between saying "Fiji has a 95% chance of beating West Scranton" and saying "I am 95% confident that the statement Fiji will beat West Scranton is accurate".

Because, either way you look at it, someone had to be 95% sure that Fiji would win to make that statement, whether you say its confidence in the statement that fiji will win, or just call it odds of winning, either way, it still says the OP was *almost* entirely certain that Fiji would win the game.

I don't care how its intended to be interpreted, it comes off as if the OP felt there was almost no chance West Scranton would win the match, 95% is still 95% in favor and just 5% against, either way you word it...



Except that neither of those statements defines what a 95% confidence level means. Having a 95% confidence level in predicting that Fiji will win is not the same as being 95% certain that Fiji will win. If you don't understand how confidence levels work, then you're probably best off just not commenting on them.

Besides, since all of this was done before West Scranton boosted, any predictions were completely invalidated before the game was even played anyways. Not sure why people are still getting hung up on this.

Sorry you feel that way Brady. To be honest with you, it really doesn't matter to us. You could block the entire Invader roster and it won't make a bit of difference.I personally think a league without a little trash talking is somewhat boring. We made more friends in this game than I can count, most of whom started out as rival teams trash talking. What matters to us is that were winning and having fun. This is a game after all so lighten up and enjoy it.

Originally posted by BradyFTW

Besides, since all of this was done before West Scranton boosted, any predictions were completely invalidated before the game was even played anyways. Not sure why people are still getting hung up on this.

This was the point I was trying to make a couple of pages back, but I think it fell upon deaf ears.

Originally posted by Vilita
Originally posted by lukin83

Originally posted by nautilus


I've always appreciated the rankings and predictions. It wasn't just Scranton that thought the predictions were 95% certainty of victory as in indicated in the responses. For me, it doesn't make any difference if we're favored or underdogs but the language in post was misleading.

Brantford over Brisbane (99.9% confidence level)
New England over Canberra (21% confidence level)
Fiji over West Scranton (95 % confidence level)
Emerald City over Newcastle (34% confidence level)

Anyway, Good luck Strike in tomorrows game!

I noticed you left this part off...


* % Confidence level is NOT the same as odds of winning.

Just to rile somebody up, please explain the difference between saying "Fiji has a 95% chance of beating West Scranton" and saying "I am 95% confident that the statement Fiji will beat West Scranton is accurate".

Because, either way you look at it, someone had to be 95% sure that Fiji would win to make that statement, whether you say its confidence in the statement that fiji will win, or just call it odds of winning, either way, it still says the OP was *almost* entirely certain that Fiji would win the game.

I don't care how its intended to be interpreted, it comes off as if the OP felt there was almost no chance West Scranton would win the match, 95% is still 95% in favor and just 5% against, either way you word it...



Ok, it's been over a decade since my graduate stats classes, but if I remember correctly 3 standard devs above the mean in a normal distribution is around 90%, so his confidence number is saying that he is 95% sure that the favored team has a 90% chance of winning!

So overall he's giving the favored team an ~85.5% chance of winning, but just saying it in a fancy way

Originally posted by the hurricane
hahaha can't say I'm not happy the mustang lost.

ahh well...you win some....you lose one. everyone loves it when we lose, it's like christmas...only happens once a year