I almost read this article.
Then I realised it was really long, so didn't.
Plus I don't like stats that much.
I take your points, but one fly in the ointment I think is that 4th this season is arguably tougher than ever before.
From 3rd to 7th is pretty wide open, getting 'average' points for 4th probably won't be enough with the competition being tougher.
We should really go for 12/12 everymonth and settle for nothing less.
But 5s for a well researched article
ivans point is well made... <laugH>
righteous is of course right so i nthe end if we are on track right now and say are there or thereabouts next march it is then that every game will count. being in with a shout will be a good thing and no europe favours us slightly.
leiva, city are trying for 12/12 but are not quite there yet Trying our hardest in each game is a fair point, my point is that we will have to accept anyone can beat anone in this league so ok drawing with swansea is a bad day but is offset by other results so the thing is the team we've got is on track for 4th and seeing we are developing thats got to be positive.
comment by IvanGolacIsMagic (U5291)
posted 59 minutes ago
I almost read this article.
Then I realised it was really long, so didn't.
Plus I don't like stats that much.
Then don't comment, as when people read a long article, they don't want to read a whinge about its length straight after.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
OP 5 stars
I still think a draw should share the points i.e. 1.5 each team.
STATSI prefer.......take every game as it comes!
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Good article.
So far you say you've averaged 7.3333 points every 4 games. That amounts to an average of 1.8333 points per game.
Over the course of a season, that points per game ratio would result in a team ending the season with 69 points.
In the previous 10 seasons, that has resulted in a team finishing no higher than 3rd and no lower than 5th. It has been enough to finish 4th or higher in 6 out of the last 10 seasons.
Upto and including last season, there have been 19 seasons in which 38 games were played and 3 points were awarded for a win. In those seasons, the 1.8333 points per game average (or 7.3333 points ever 4 games average) have seen teams finish:
2nd on one occassion.
3rd - 8 times
4th - 6 times
5th - 4 times
If we afford the very same criteria for all the other teams (currently in the top 7), and on the proviso that each team maintains its 4 game average for the remainder of the season, then the final table would look like this:
1st City: 107 pts
2nd United: 91 pts
3rd Spurs: 83 pts
4th Newcastle: 79 pts
5th - 7th Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool: 69 pts
No disrespect intended to Newcastle, but I think most people (including in all probability most Newcastle fans) think it's doubtful for them to maintain their form from their first 12 games throughout the duration of the season. Which, if the case, would mean (based on your stats) a 3 way fight for 4th that I'm sure you'll agree is way too close for comfort.
What this shows is that there is no room for error. Liverpool at worst have to maintain their points per game (or points for every 4 game) ratio just to be in with a shout for 4th. Not to guarantee it.
Which means only one conclusion. Either Liverpool maintain their current form and Arsenal and Chelsea (and indeed Newcastle) don't. Or Liverpool have to improve.
Anfield RAP
I hate it when commentators say after a draw, the teams share the points. 3 points are available in a game, they should share them. Just my thoughts.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by fitlfc (U2366)
posted 56 minutes ago
Anfield RAP
I hate it when commentators say after a draw, the teams share the points. 3 points are available in a game, they should share them. Just my thoughts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah that .5 could have made a difference if added to our points total after draws!
excellent points by ripley's cat who has added a lot to my original point.
I had looked at the preivous 10 seasons only for the rationale behind 70points and it seems to be a nice figure to aim for.
the table you put forth does indeed show just how bloody good utd and city have been so far and one would expect them to drop off that pace, like phil taylor on an average of 120 you know by the end it'll be lower.
The point that either we continue as we are or we must improve is a good one. What i would predict is that;
1. kenny's teams have always got stronger as the season goes on to finish well, add this to the natrual gelling of new players and i think we can pick up a bit
2. newcastle with the best will have the issue of squad depth and it is usual for a few injuries to hurt a squad that size (see villa for years) We have done without carroll and gerrard remember.
3. I am interested in what spurs do and how they go over the christmas. I have to wonder about them going and doing that well to be honest. we all rememebr how well we played to get near 83points.
so all in all twists and turns included i think we can only be happy that
a) david n'gog is not at the club (happy?)
b) we are in with a shout for 4th and have room to get 3rd if we do improve by a few %
oh and i forgot....
if there truely are 7 sides in for the top 4 that means that inevitably they will take points off each other and so someone has to lose out
so far we have:
beaten arsenal
beaten chelsea
lost to tottenham
drew with utd.
3 of the 4 have been away... if we keep that up we will certainly be on the positive side of the mini league at the top! Roll on city i say......
But why is taking the stats for points from each group of 4 games anymore informative than taking the points per game?
All it seems to be doing is excusing relatively poor results such as home draws against Sunderland and Swansea by combining them with relatively good results like away wins against Arsenal and Chelsea to prove that overall we're doing ok. The league table and points per game already tells us that.
This doesn't seem to me to be a very constructive approach. If we concentrate on raising our game against the lower placed teams as we do against the higher placed teams we will improve both points per game and points per 4 games and consequently our league position. If we aim for a consistent 7 points per 4 games we are just brushing poor results under the carpet in an attempt to maintain equilibrium.
the reason is simple (to me at least)
going over 4 games shows more about form in my mind.
going over 4 games makes the points per game figure more real in my mind (1.33 points.game or win 2 and draw 1 out of 4)
finally while you are correct about going and doing better v weak teams I find that the very best clubs may lose one but they almost always go and win the next few games to put it right.
its highly rare for a utd to lose twice in a row basically.
The points per game ratio is without doubt important. But I agree with moreinjuredthanowen in that taking an average for every four games does show more about form. And of course, at the time moreinjured wrote this article, 12 games were played (3 groups of 4), so looking back at those games and grouping them into groups of 4 in order to look forward makes complete sense. What the approach of grouping games into games of 4 will also show is how consistent a team has been over the course of a season.
I also think you're right moreinjured - the points totals for City, United, and Spurs I would expect not to be as high as I stated in my post. It's important to note that because the form of City and United has been so impressive, it renders it pretty much impossible to improve on it (same to a lesser extent in regards to Spurs). In regards to Liverpool (and indeed Chelsea and Arsenal) however, there is room for improvement. So while I don't think that City, United, and Spurs will attain the number of points I stated in my previous post, there is more of a chance that Liverpool, Arsenal, and Chelsea will end up accruing more points than I stated.
You also raise a good point about the importance of games against the other top 6/7 rivals. What's interesting is that your results in the games played against the top 6/7 rivals actually reflects your points for 4 games overall. That being 7 out of a possible 12. And that 3 of those 4 games were played away from home makes that stat even more impressive.
Sure, people may say that you played Arsenal and Chelsea when they were struggling, but to me that doesn't matter. Those (away) games are now out of the way. Similarly to City when they played Spurs - people are now saying that City wouldn't beat Spurs 5-1 at WHL if they played them at this moment in time, and they are probably right in saying that, but the fact is City don't have to face Spurs at WHL again this season. Just as Liverpool don't have to face Chelsea and Arsenal away. Simply put, those games are now out of the way.
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
consistency?
Page 1 of 1
posted on 21/11/11
I almost read this article.
Then I realised it was really long, so didn't.
Plus I don't like stats that much.
posted on 21/11/11
I take your points, but one fly in the ointment I think is that 4th this season is arguably tougher than ever before.
From 3rd to 7th is pretty wide open, getting 'average' points for 4th probably won't be enough with the competition being tougher.
posted on 21/11/11
We should really go for 12/12 everymonth and settle for nothing less.
But 5s for a well researched article
posted on 21/11/11
ivans point is well made... <laugH>
righteous is of course right so i nthe end if we are on track right now and say are there or thereabouts next march it is then that every game will count. being in with a shout will be a good thing and no europe favours us slightly.
leiva, city are trying for 12/12 but are not quite there yet Trying our hardest in each game is a fair point, my point is that we will have to accept anyone can beat anone in this league so ok drawing with swansea is a bad day but is offset by other results so the thing is the team we've got is on track for 4th and seeing we are developing thats got to be positive.
posted on 21/11/11
comment by IvanGolacIsMagic (U5291)
posted 59 minutes ago
I almost read this article.
Then I realised it was really long, so didn't.
Plus I don't like stats that much.
Then don't comment, as when people read a long article, they don't want to read a whinge about its length straight after.
posted on 21/11/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 21/11/11
OP 5 stars
I still think a draw should share the points i.e. 1.5 each team.
posted on 21/11/11
STATSI prefer.......take every game as it comes!
posted on 21/11/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 21/11/11
Good article.
So far you say you've averaged 7.3333 points every 4 games. That amounts to an average of 1.8333 points per game.
Over the course of a season, that points per game ratio would result in a team ending the season with 69 points.
In the previous 10 seasons, that has resulted in a team finishing no higher than 3rd and no lower than 5th. It has been enough to finish 4th or higher in 6 out of the last 10 seasons.
Upto and including last season, there have been 19 seasons in which 38 games were played and 3 points were awarded for a win. In those seasons, the 1.8333 points per game average (or 7.3333 points ever 4 games average) have seen teams finish:
2nd on one occassion.
3rd - 8 times
4th - 6 times
5th - 4 times
If we afford the very same criteria for all the other teams (currently in the top 7), and on the proviso that each team maintains its 4 game average for the remainder of the season, then the final table would look like this:
1st City: 107 pts
2nd United: 91 pts
3rd Spurs: 83 pts
4th Newcastle: 79 pts
5th - 7th Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool: 69 pts
No disrespect intended to Newcastle, but I think most people (including in all probability most Newcastle fans) think it's doubtful for them to maintain their form from their first 12 games throughout the duration of the season. Which, if the case, would mean (based on your stats) a 3 way fight for 4th that I'm sure you'll agree is way too close for comfort.
What this shows is that there is no room for error. Liverpool at worst have to maintain their points per game (or points for every 4 game) ratio just to be in with a shout for 4th. Not to guarantee it.
Which means only one conclusion. Either Liverpool maintain their current form and Arsenal and Chelsea (and indeed Newcastle) don't. Or Liverpool have to improve.
posted on 21/11/11
Anfield RAP
I hate it when commentators say after a draw, the teams share the points. 3 points are available in a game, they should share them. Just my thoughts.
posted on 21/11/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 21/11/11
comment by fitlfc (U2366)
posted 56 minutes ago
Anfield RAP
I hate it when commentators say after a draw, the teams share the points. 3 points are available in a game, they should share them. Just my thoughts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah that .5 could have made a difference if added to our points total after draws!
posted on 21/11/11
excellent points by ripley's cat who has added a lot to my original point.
I had looked at the preivous 10 seasons only for the rationale behind 70points and it seems to be a nice figure to aim for.
the table you put forth does indeed show just how bloody good utd and city have been so far and one would expect them to drop off that pace, like phil taylor on an average of 120 you know by the end it'll be lower.
The point that either we continue as we are or we must improve is a good one. What i would predict is that;
1. kenny's teams have always got stronger as the season goes on to finish well, add this to the natrual gelling of new players and i think we can pick up a bit
2. newcastle with the best will have the issue of squad depth and it is usual for a few injuries to hurt a squad that size (see villa for years) We have done without carroll and gerrard remember.
3. I am interested in what spurs do and how they go over the christmas. I have to wonder about them going and doing that well to be honest. we all rememebr how well we played to get near 83points.
so all in all twists and turns included i think we can only be happy that
a) david n'gog is not at the club (happy?)
b) we are in with a shout for 4th and have room to get 3rd if we do improve by a few %
posted on 21/11/11
oh and i forgot....
if there truely are 7 sides in for the top 4 that means that inevitably they will take points off each other and so someone has to lose out
so far we have:
beaten arsenal
beaten chelsea
lost to tottenham
drew with utd.
3 of the 4 have been away... if we keep that up we will certainly be on the positive side of the mini league at the top! Roll on city i say......
posted on 22/11/11
But why is taking the stats for points from each group of 4 games anymore informative than taking the points per game?
All it seems to be doing is excusing relatively poor results such as home draws against Sunderland and Swansea by combining them with relatively good results like away wins against Arsenal and Chelsea to prove that overall we're doing ok. The league table and points per game already tells us that.
This doesn't seem to me to be a very constructive approach. If we concentrate on raising our game against the lower placed teams as we do against the higher placed teams we will improve both points per game and points per 4 games and consequently our league position. If we aim for a consistent 7 points per 4 games we are just brushing poor results under the carpet in an attempt to maintain equilibrium.
posted on 24/11/11
the reason is simple (to me at least)
going over 4 games shows more about form in my mind.
going over 4 games makes the points per game figure more real in my mind (1.33 points.game or win 2 and draw 1 out of 4)
finally while you are correct about going and doing better v weak teams I find that the very best clubs may lose one but they almost always go and win the next few games to put it right.
its highly rare for a utd to lose twice in a row basically.
posted on 24/11/11
The points per game ratio is without doubt important. But I agree with moreinjuredthanowen in that taking an average for every four games does show more about form. And of course, at the time moreinjured wrote this article, 12 games were played (3 groups of 4), so looking back at those games and grouping them into groups of 4 in order to look forward makes complete sense. What the approach of grouping games into games of 4 will also show is how consistent a team has been over the course of a season.
I also think you're right moreinjured - the points totals for City, United, and Spurs I would expect not to be as high as I stated in my post. It's important to note that because the form of City and United has been so impressive, it renders it pretty much impossible to improve on it (same to a lesser extent in regards to Spurs). In regards to Liverpool (and indeed Chelsea and Arsenal) however, there is room for improvement. So while I don't think that City, United, and Spurs will attain the number of points I stated in my previous post, there is more of a chance that Liverpool, Arsenal, and Chelsea will end up accruing more points than I stated.
You also raise a good point about the importance of games against the other top 6/7 rivals. What's interesting is that your results in the games played against the top 6/7 rivals actually reflects your points for 4 games overall. That being 7 out of a possible 12. And that 3 of those 4 games were played away from home makes that stat even more impressive.
Sure, people may say that you played Arsenal and Chelsea when they were struggling, but to me that doesn't matter. Those (away) games are now out of the way. Similarly to City when they played Spurs - people are now saying that City wouldn't beat Spurs 5-1 at WHL if they played them at this moment in time, and they are probably right in saying that, but the fact is City don't have to face Spurs at WHL again this season. Just as Liverpool don't have to face Chelsea and Arsenal away. Simply put, those games are now out of the way.
Page 1 of 1