Points required thread

[Benguin]

As we reach the business end of the season I thought a little table evaluating our requirements for finishing certain places would be good. It can be updated at the end of each match week.

The table shows the maximum required points to finish in the respective place. Each week depending on our game and others performances it may stay the same, increase by 1-3, decrease by 1-3 or a particular place becomes no longer possible to achieve.

At this stage the table is thus: (maximum points to achieve that place)

1. 28

2. 25

3. 24

4. 21

5. 20

6. 18

7. 16

8. 15

9. 14

10. 13

11. 11

12. 10

13. 7

14. 6

15. 4

16. 1

17. No longer possible

18. No longer possible

19. No longer possible

20. No longer possible

[Les-TA-Jon]

http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/104279-the-road-to-a-1st-place-or-4th-place-finish/ 

 

May be of interest to you...

 

Your table isn't that useful, because it's only talking about the maximum points required. But we KNOW that all teams will drop points so...?

[Jordan]

http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/104279-the-road-to-a-1st-place-or-4th-place-finish/

May be of interest to you...

Your table isn't that useful, because it's only talking about the maximum points required. But we KNOW that all teams will drop points so...?

Maximum points required is similar to the "magic number" concept in baseball and it includes points dropped by the opposition.

For example (assuming Spurs remain the 2nd-place team, then again they would do in the form required in this scenario):

Leicester finish the season 8-1-1 = 25 points

Spurs finish the season 9-0-1 = 3 points dropped

25 + 3 = 28 and Leicester win the league by one point.

[Les-TA-Jon]

Maximum points required is similar to the "magic number" concept in baseball and it includes points dropped by the opposition.

For example (assuming Spurs remain the 2nd-place team, then again they would do in the form required in this scenario):

Leicester finish the season 8-1-1 = 25 points

Spurs finish the season 9-0-1 = 3 points dropped

25 + 3 = 28 and Leicester win the league by one point.

 

Yeah i get that. But it's not particularly useful to say 

 

We need 28 points out of the remaining 30 to guarantee a 1st place finish - because:

 

1) that's obvious 

2) it clear that we will require less than that

[Izzy]

[Detroit Blues]

Yeah i get that. But it's not particularly useful to say 

 

We need 28 points out of the remaining 30 to guarantee a 1st place finish - because:

 

1) that's obvious 

2) it clear that we will require less than that

 

The magic number is a good way of thinking about a two team race for the title because it factors in points dropped by our rivals in addition to the points we gain.

 

Prior to the midweek results the magic number was 32. That means we needed 32 points (won by Leicester or dropped by the 2nd place team) over the next 11 matches to guarantee the premier league title.

 

Leicester drew against West Brom, so we gained a point, reducing that magic number to 31.

The 2nd place team, Tottenham, lost to West Ham, dropping 3 points, reducing the magic number to 28.

 

At this stage a Spurs loss puts us just as close to the title as a Leicester win, as they both reduce the magic number by 3. When we get down to the end of the season and that number is something like 6 points over the final 3 games, it will make it very easy to understand how we can get to that number (2 Leicester wins or 1 Leicester win and 1 Tottenham loss, etc)

[Jordan]

Yeah i get that. But it's not particularly useful to say

We need 28 points out of the remaining 30 to guarantee a 1st place finish - because:

1) that's obvious

2) it clear that we will require less than that

Come on, man. This isn't a hard concept.

[Sionnach gorm]

I'm planning on living week by week, just like my pay.

[Carl the Llama]

The magic number is a good way of thinking about a two team race for the title because it factors in points dropped by our rivals in addition to the points we gain.

 

Prior to the midweek results the magic number was 32. That means we needed 32 points (won by Leicester or dropped by the 2nd place team) over the next 11 matches to guarantee the premier league title.

 

Leicester drew against West Brom, so we gained a point, reducing that magic number to 31.

The 2nd place team, Tottenham, lost to West Ham, dropping 3 points, reducing the magic number to 28.

 

At this stage a Spurs loss puts us just as close to the title as a Leicester win, as they both reduce the magic number by 3. When we get down to the end of the season and that number is something like 6 points over the final 3 games, it will make it very easy to understand how we can get to that number (2 Leicester wins or 1 Leicester win and 1 Tottenham loss, etc)

 

Come on, man. This isn't a hard concept.

It's not a hard concept.  What's difficult to understand is how you both advocate an unnecessarily abstract way of looking at what the maximum number of points is that we need to win to finish above Spurs.  Because that's all this magic number is as you calculate it; at no point does it deviate from the figure you get when asking the simple question: "If Spurs win all their remaining games how many points do we need to finish above them?"  This is what Benguin means by maximum points required.

[Carl the Llama]

I mean, what do you learn from it?  That it's ok to drop a few points as long as the other teams drop enough points to reduce the magic number and therefore the amount of points we need to beat them  Great, all you're doing is playing around with the maximum points required and making it sound more complex than it is.

[Carl the Llama]

.Interesting table though Benguin.

[ozleicester]

If each of the top four, drops 3 points over each of the next 10 matches and then you add in Manchester untied who could pick up 30 points then overtook everyone but then were deducted nine points for being insufferable cvnts and then those nine points were divided up amongst the other nineteen clubs and each of those clubs was then give two weeks to reset their table positions and then each of the big four teams below Leicester were given a bonus twelve points just because they felt really bad about being below "little Leicester" and they were able to share those twelve point and allocate them to whoever they please, its entirely possible that with ten games to go i will have no clue about how many points are required, how many points we or our opposition will get or whether or not my toasted sandwich will be evenly cooked both sides or just dark brown one side and lightly toasted on the other.

 

so.... come on yoooo bloooooooooooooosssssssssssss

[Jordan]

It's not a hard concept. What's difficult to understand is how you both advocate an unnecessarily abstract way of looking at what the maximum number of points is that we need to win to finish above Spurs. Because that's all this magic number is as you calculate it; at no point does it deviate from the figure you get when asking the simple question: "If Spurs win all their remaining games how many points do we need to finish above them?" This is what Benguin means by maximum points required.

It's almost as if I didn't post right here, right in this thread, just up above, an example where there is some utility to what's just a simple yet handy and mostly fun way of keeping track of a moving target in a case where Spurs don't win all of their remaining games.

[Detroit Blues]

If each of the top four, drops 3 points over each of the next 10 matches and then you add in Manchester untied who could pick up 30 points then overtook everyone but then were deducted nine points for being insufferable cvnts and then those nine points were divided up amongst the other nineteen clubs and each of those clubs was then give two weeks to reset their table positions and then each of the big four teams below Leicester were given a bonus twelve points just because they felt really bad about being below "little Leicester" and they were able to share those twelve point and allocate them to whoever they please, its entirely possible that with ten games to go i will have no clue about how many points are required, how many points we or our opposition will get or whether or not my toasted sandwich will be evenly cooked both sides or just dark brown one side and lightly toasted on the other.

so.... come on yoooo bloooooooooooooosssssssssssss

[Carl the Llama]

It's almost as if I didn't post right here, right in this thread, just up above, an example where there is some utility to what's just a simple yet handy and mostly fun way of keeping track of a moving target in a case where Spurs don't win all of their remaining games.

Only if you ignore that I directly addressed the subject in my post... I'm still right about your magic number always being the max points required and all you're doing is analysing how it can change with theoretical results.

[Jordan]

Only if you ignore that I directly addressed the subject in my post... I'm still right about your magic number always being the max points required and all you're doing is analysing how it can change with theoretical results.

Edit: I don't really want to get into a fight over this.

There's neither any real analysis nor theoretical results that come into play here, it's just a simple tool.

[Renart]

If each of the top four, drops 3 points over each of the next 10 matches and then you add in Manchester untied who could pick up 30 points then overtook everyone but then were deducted nine points for being insufferable cvnts and then those nine points were divided up amongst the other nineteen clubs and each of those clubs was then give two weeks to reset their table positions and then each of the big four teams below Leicester were given a bonus twelve points just because they felt really bad about being below "little Leicester" and they were able to share those twelve point and allocate them to whoever they please, its entirely possible that with ten games to go i will have no clue about how many points are required, how many points we or our opposition will get or whether or not my toasted sandwich will be evenly cooked both sides or just dark brown one side and lightly toasted on the other.

 

so.... come on yoooo bloooooooooooooosssssssssssss

 

You are batty!

[Carl the Llama]

Edit: I don't really want to get into a fight over this.

There's neither any real analysis nor theoretical results that come into play here, it's just a simple tool.

Good because it wouldn't be much of a fight :

 

I've now looked your magic number up on wikipedia since I found it astonishing that you would talk down to Jon about it being an easy concept yet appear to not grasp my mathematically reasoned query of why bother making a stat sound more complicated than it is before seeming to imply that I don't understand a simple tool after I reaffirmed my understanding of the maths at play.

 

Clearly I'm just not getting it.

 

Here's wikipedia:

The magic number can also be calculated as W_B + GR_B - W_A + 1, where

• W_B is the number of wins that Team B has in the season
• GR_B is the number of games remaining for Team B in the season
• W_A is the number of wins that Team A has in the season

This second formula basically says: Assume Team B wins every remaining game. Calculate how many games team A needs to win to surpass team B's maximum total by 1. Using the example above and with the same 162-game season, team B has 7 games remaining.

 

Here's me:

...Because that's all this magic number is as you calculate it; at no point does it deviate from the figure you get when asking the simple question: "If Spurs win all their remaining games how many points do we need to finish above them?"  This is what Benguin means by maximum points required.

Huh.  So I was actually correct to say that this magic number is the same as max points needed to secure top.  It's almost like I understand basic maths after all.  Who knew?

 

I also disagree with your apparent understanding of the words "analysis" and "theoretical" but let's leave it there and call a truce because I cba to get into another pointless debate.

[Les-TA-Jon]

The magic number is a good way of thinking about a two team race for the title because it factors in points dropped by our rivals in addition to the points we gain.

 

Prior to the midweek results the magic number was 32. That means we needed 32 points (won by Leicester or dropped by the 2nd place team) over the next 11 matches to guarantee the premier league title.

 

Leicester drew against West Brom, so we gained a point, reducing that magic number to 31.

The 2nd place team, Tottenham, lost to West Ham, dropping 3 points, reducing the magic number to 28.

 

At this stage a Spurs loss puts us just as close to the title as a Leicester win, as they both reduce the magic number by 3. When we get down to the end of the season and that number is something like 6 points over the final 3 games, it will make it very easy to understand how we can get to that number (2 Leicester wins or 1 Leicester win and 1 Tottenham loss, etc)

 

 

Come on, man. This isn't a hard concept.

 

It isn't a hard concept. Clearly, as myself and Carl the Llama have said, your essentially looking at:

 

Remaining games x 3 + current points + 1 = points needed to 'guarantee' something. It's exactly what you described it as - 'a simple tool'

 

It's only really useful if you use it as part of a wider analysis - like I've done on my other thread - http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/104279-the-road-to-a-1st-place-or-4th-place-finish/ 

 

From there you know the maximum points required and 'move backwards' towards a realistic number - because as I previously said - your 'simple tool' isn't that useful, saying "If we get 28 points out of the next 30 then we are guaranteed to win the league" is great and all, but it doesn't really tell us anything, because:

 

1) it's obvious that that would be enough

2) all teams will drop points in the meantime

3) the eventual requirement will obviously be lower

 

Come on, this isn't a hard concept...

[yorkie1999]

It isn't a hard concept. Clearly, as myself and Carl the Llama have said, your essentially looking at:

 

Remaining games x 3 + current points + 1 = points needed to 'guarantee' something. It's exactly what you described it as - 'a simple tool'

 

It's only really useful if you use it as part of a wider analysis - like I've done on my other thread - http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/104279-the-road-to-a-1st-place-or-4th-place-finish/ 

 

From there you know the maximum points required and 'move backwards' towards a realistic number - because as I previously said - your 'simple tool' isn't that useful, saying "If we get 28 points out of the next 30 then we are guaranteed to win the league" is great and all, but it doesn't really tell us anything, because:

 

1) it's obvious that that would be enough

2) all teams will drop points in the meantime

3) the eventual requirement will obviously be lower

 

Come on, this isn't a hard concept...

No it's not, it's just boring.

[Carl the Llama]

No it's not, it's just boring.

Perhaps, and mostly pointless, but when someone condescends to you over a subject where your statement is provably correct and they clearly don't actually understand the mechanics behind whatever they're showing off about then you have a thicker skin than I to walk on and let them be both wrong and arrogant about it.

 

Equally if I'm being a dick and completely missing the mark, in the grand scheme of things I appreciate people having the nerve to correct me even if it doesn't feel great at first to be taken down a peg.

[Detroit Blues]

Perhaps, and mostly pointless, but when someone condescends to you over a subject where your statement is provably correct and they clearly don't actually understand the mechanics behind whatever they're showing off about then you have a thicker skin than I to walk on and let them be both wrong and arrogant about it.

 

Equally if I'm being a dick and completely missing the mark, in the grand scheme of things I appreciate people having the nerve to correct me even if it doesn't feel great at first to be taken down a peg.

 

I think you're both kind of being dicks about it. I personally like magic numbers, but I don't necessarily care if you use it or understand it either .

 

Apologies to Benguin who made a lovely post and had his thread hijacked.

[Benguin]

I'm planning on living week by week, just like my pay.

Wish I could do that rather than living 1 day in a week with my pay!

I think you're both kind of being dicks about it. I personally like magic numbers, but I don't necessarily care if you use it or understand it either .

Apologies to Benguin who made a lovely post and had his thread hijacked.

Thankyou the idea seemed useful at the time

[fuchsntf]

I think you're both kind of being dicks about it. I personally like magic numbers, but I don't necessarily care if you use it or understand it either .

 

Apologies to Benguin who made a lovely post and had his thread hijacked.

Well said mate..

Some like to show their mathmatical prowess, Benguin blows them away by keeping it simple.

I am an IT specialist, but bored with figures, why get macho about it , I say.

[Jordan]

I'm not saying you guys don't know the math, and I'm sure you're all decent fellows, but I do have questions about whether some of you have the social skills to realize when certain math discussion is fitting to insert into a discussion and when it's not.

I've been looking all around my posts for instances when I said that the "magic number" concept is "better" than anything or when I said it's a way to project a team's finish, and I can't find it, so I have no idea where some of you did. I'm talking about arithmetic.

As for Jon, if we were talking about the "wider analysis" and anything besides the very simple idea of maximum points required, wouldn't we be talking about that in your other thread?