Calling all NCFC maths geniuses!

[Canary Jedi 573]

What's the probability of this happenning? There is no doubt a way to show this mathematically:

My 14 year old son last week in his Maths lesson had a 21 sided dice. He challenged his teacher that if the teacher rolled 17 three times in a row then Norwich would win the league.

According to my son (I gave him the full interrogation treatment on this as I didn't believe him at first) the teacher did exactly that - rolled the number 17 three times in a row!

It got me thinking that to do it once is a 1 in 21 change - quite do-able. To do it twice, the probability is a lot more, still do-able maybe. But 3 times in a row?

So what are the chances? And more importantly, can it come true 😉

[FenwayFrank 2,456]

The odds on that happening are massive ( I can’t be bothered to work it out ) 

[Hairy Canary 668]

Odds are 9,264 to 1 (21 cubed)

Our chances of winning the league are less than that! 

 

Edited July 8, 2019 by Hairy Canary

[splendidrush 699]

Is it 21×21×21 or am I a simpleton?

[GenerationA47 747]

7 minutes ago, Canary Jedi said:

What's the probability of this happenning?

Not a genius so this may be wrong, but 1/21 x 1/21 x 1/21 = 0.0001 approximately 

or 1 in 9,261

 

Gosh, wish Norwich was as loaded as your son’s die 

[Badger 2,405]

Why do you need to throw 17 three times in a row?

[lake district canary 4,531]

For me, at the start of the season all teams start equal with no points....so in that sense, the possibility that we could win the league is the same as all the other clubs so at this stage it ought to be 20-1. As the season progresses, depending on results the odds will change up or down.

Leicester won it against well defined odds and we won the league last season totally against the odds........so in both cases the "odds" were totally wrong. 

I strongly feel that in football people get sucked into a mentality that is affected by what people call odds, probablilities, what the stats predict etc etc etc.....whereas in reality football is often very unpredictable.

The odds of winning the league are whatever you want them to be. I just looked up the odds online to see what we were quoted at and I laughed when I saw 2000-1. The last time I laughed at odds was when I saw us 250-1 against to beat Man Utd at CR in 2004.....we won 2-0.

 

[Thirsty Lizard 3,155]

13 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

Leicester won it against well defined odds and we won the league last season totally against the odds........so in both cases the "odds" were totally wrong. 

 

In neither case were the odds 'wrong' Lakey. The odds merely suggested that at that point the outcome was unlikely. Just because something is unlikely it doesn't mean it won't happen.

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,777]

28 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

The odds of winning the league are whatever you want them to be. I just looked up the odds online to see what we were quoted at and I laughed when I saw 2000-1. The last time I laughed at odds was when I saw us 250-1 against to beat Man Utd at CR in 2004.....we won 2-0.

Erm... I think you've made a mistake of some sort there. 10/1 maximum. 

And anyway, you say that odds are 'wrong', but the bookies are always there or thereabouts. If they were wrong all the time, or even sometimes, they'd be out of business.

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

Can anyone remember the odds on us winning the title last season at this stage ?  Just curious really.

 

When Leicester won the Prem, their opening odds were 5,000-1 along with most of the bottom teams from the previous season.  Since then I think the bookies don't give such long opening odds at the bottom end, although the difference between 5,000/1 and 2,000/1 is not that great in reality in terms of the implied chance of the event happening.

 

But yes a lot of confusion about odds being wrong, if something has a 5% chance of happening that would translate into 20/1 (ignoring the bookies margin) but that doesn't change the fact that 5% chances do sometimes still happen.

[lake district canary 4,531]

28 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

1 hour ago, lake district canary said:

The odds of winning the league are whatever you want them to be. I just looked up the odds online to see what we were quoted at and I laughed when I saw 2000-1. The last time I laughed at odds was when I saw us 250-1 against to beat Man Utd at CR in 2004.....we won 2-0.

Erm... I think you've made a mistake of some sort there. 10/1 maximum.

Yeah, sorry I should have clarified, it was 250-1 with a 2-0 score line and Ashton scoring the first goal. I don't bet very much but I genuinely thought that was quite ridiculous.

[canarydan23 4,060]

1 hour ago, lake district canary said:

For me, at the start of the season all teams start equal with no points....so in that sense, the possibility that we could win the league is the same as all the other clubs so at this stage it ought to be 20-1. As the season progresses, depending on results the odds will change up or down.

That makes no sense. Have you not heard of a thing called variables?

To genuinely believe that you would need to believe that experience or players, talent of players, ability of the coaching team, aptitude of the manager/coach, transfer and wage budgets etc, etc have absolutely no bearing on the sport of football.

[CDMullins 436]

Lakey 100% believes he has a 50/50 chance of winning the lottery,

 

Because he can either win or lose.

[Ian 1,129]

1 minute ago, canarydan23 said:

That makes no sense. Have you not heard of a thing called variables?

To genuinely believe that you would need to believe that experience or players, talent of players, ability of the coaching team, aptitude of the manager/coach, transfer and wage budgets etc, etc have absolutely no bearing on the sport of football.

That was a very polite and restrained response.

Lakey, I really think you should at least try and understand the basic of probability.

[lake district canary 4,531]

23 minutes ago, Ian said:

That was a very polite and restrained response.
Lakey, I really think you should at least try and understand the basic of probability.

You are probably right, but in football terms, probability is only relative.....

[dylanisabaddog 4,866]

1 hour ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Erm... I think you've made a mistake of some sort there. 10/1 maximum. 

And anyway, you say that odds are 'wrong', but the bookies are always there or thereabouts. If they were wrong all the time, or even sometimes, they'd be out of business.

It was 10/1. Even those were ridiculous odds. So ridiculous that I had £5 on it and ended up wishing I'd risked more. 

[canarydan23 4,060]

32 minutes ago, Ian said:

That was a very polite and restrained response.

F*ck off.

[Feedthewolf 4,844]

22 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

You are probably right, but in football terms, probability is only relative.....

What does this even mean?

[Tetteys Jig 830]

Was the number 17 on all 21 sides of the dice 😉

[lake district canary 4,531]

59 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

1 hour ago, lake district canary said:

You are probably right, but in football terms, probability is only relative.....

What does this even mean?

It means probability is only relevant to what is perceived as being probable, as on us finishing mid-table last season. The fact that we won the league and were promoted by eleven points clear of third suggests that the probability factor at the start of the season was less than accurate - in other words it wasn't improbable at all that we would win the league - because we did it. 

So probability is only relative to what is perceived from the information available at the time. 

[Feedthewolf 4,844]

12 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

It means probability is only relevant to what is perceived as being probable, as on us finishing mid-table last season. The fact that we won the league and were promoted by eleven points clear of third suggests that the probability factor at the start of the season was less than accurate - in other words it wasn't improbable at all that we would win the league - because we did it.  

So probability is only relative to what is perceived from the information available at the time. 

Does anyone else understand this, or is it me being thick?

[Rock The Boat 1,324]

18 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

It means probability is only relevant to what is perceived as being probable, as on us finishing mid-table last season. The fact that we won the league and were promoted by eleven points clear of third suggests that the probability factor at the start of the season was less than accurate - in other words it wasn't improbable at all that we would win the league - because we did it. 

So probability is only relative to what is perceived from the information available at the time. 

This makes no sense whatsoever, lol

[All the Germans 1,075]

26 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

It means probability is only relevant to what is perceived as being probable, as on us finishing mid-table last season. The fact that we won the league and were promoted by eleven points clear of third suggests that the probability factor at the start of the season was less than accurate - in other words it wasn't improbable at all that we would win the league - because we did it. 

So probability is only relative to what is perceived from the information available at the time. 

Just because something improbable happened, it does not mean it was wrong to class it as improbable in the first place. The probability was still - and always will be - correct; it's a way of quantifying and ordering outcomes based upon their likelihood. It does not forbid an unlikely outcome from occurring.

[Nuff Said 5,088]

"Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so." ― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

[lake district canary 4,531]

In football terms, probability is an unreliable guide to what will happen, therefore working out probabilities doesn't have much relevance to anything.  It's even worse when you look at bookies' odds.  5000-1 for Leicester was a joke - as is 2000-1 for us.....the real probability is that no-one can really say with any accuracy where we will end up. 

I'll be having a small wager on us winning the league....because in football, guesswork or fantasy is just as likely to come to fruition than working out "probabilities".  I wonder how many Leicester "fantasists" had a nice payday at the end of their triumph....

 

 

[Feedthewolf 4,844]

Just now, lake district canary said:

In football terms, probability is an unreliable guide to what will happen, therefore working out probabilities doesn't have much relevance to anything.  It's even worse when you look at bookies' odds.  5000-1 for Leicester was a joke - as is 2000-1 for us.....the real probability is that no-one can really say with any accuracy where we will end up. 

I'll be having a small wager on us winning the league....because in football, guesswork or fantasy is just as likely to come to fruition than working out "probabilities".  I wonder how many Leicester "fantasists" had a nice payday at the end of their triumph....

Double facepalm.

[Mello Yello 2,278]

.......twelfty......

[lake district canary 4,531]

3 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

4 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

In football terms, probability is an unreliable guide to what will happen, therefore working out probabilities doesn't have much relevance to anything.  It's even worse when you look at bookies' odds.  5000-1 for Leicester was a joke - as is 2000-1 for us.....the real probability is that no-one can really say with any accuracy where we will end up. 

I'll be having a small wager on us winning the league....because in football, guesswork or fantasy is just as likely to come to fruition than working out "probabilities".  I wonder how many Leicester "fantasists" had a nice payday at the end of their triumph....

Double facepalm.

I wonder who were more sensible - the Leicester fans who bet on them winning the league or the statisticians who said that betting on them to win was nonsense and a waste of money.......

 

[canarydan23 4,060]

Lakey, have you ever been on an aeroplane? Because by your logic, it's a 50/50 as to whether that plane will make it to its destination. 

[lake district canary 4,531]

Nope, I don't like flying