Championship computer prediction

[dylanisabaddog 4,932]

Based on last 10 games we're in 4th place (before today). 

This is the end of season computer prediction. Having looked at our remaining fixtures I think we're capable of 72 points

Edited January 13 by dylanisabaddog

[The Real Buh 3,445]

I’m thinking more 15th. I think we’ll definitely tail off once we are “safe” but have nothing left to play for. Has to be a very slight degradation on last season, enough that a certain element of the fanbase just write it off and but another identifies the slow and steady degradation of standards at the club.

[ricardo 7,395]

We are a midling team and that prediction won't be far out. 

For me top six is possible but unlikely.

[pete 319]

I can't see us getting to 72 points. Predictor looks about right.  But not having yellow and green specs I'm more likely to be realistic on our play off chances.

[dylanisabaddog 4,932]

10 minutes ago, pete said:

I can't see us getting to 72 points. Predictor looks about right.  But not having yellow and green specs I'm more likely to be realistic on our play off chances.

Last 10 games are the equivalent of 72 points. Sargent wasn't available for most of those games and Sainz and Hanley only available for a small number. Keep everyone fit and it's possible. 

[Crafty Canary 497]

To make the play offs the usual minimum poits needed is 75. This means we need 37 points from our remaining 19 games or almost 2 points per game average. Given we are averaging 1.4 points per game this would seem a very unlikely outcome. Therefore I hope The Black Cats give the Scum a thorough thrashing this evening.

[Well b back 3,221]

Be shocked if Southampton don’t finish second, and that’s not just because of who the predictor is predicting

[Fen Canary 834]

Southampton will go up in 2nd place, Ipswich 3rd, Leeds 4th. We’ll be 9th, 2-3 points outside the playoffs 

[RobJames 881]

6 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Based on last 10 games we're in 4th place (before today). 

This is the end of season computer prediction. Having looked at our remaining fixtures I think we're capable of 72 points

or, based on current points total 46 games would have Coventry and Sunderland finishing on 68 points. Which massively scales back the usual thought total of 75 points as a minimum to finish 6th (another bit of bad news for the whiners)

Achieving that target would mean us needing to gain 1.6 points every game on average over the remainder of the season ie 3.2 points in the two games v West Brom and Coventry. So despite our shaky season so far, we now only have to achieve the usual target (75) points in our next 19 games to be in an around 6th come May. All to play for, I would suggest.

[......and Smith must score. 1,346]

26 minutes ago, RobJames said:

………despite our shaky season so far, we now only have to achieve the usual target (75) points in our next 19 games to be in an around 6th come May. All to play for, I would suggest.

Yes, the math adds up but do you really think we can average a smidgen under two points a game for the next 19 games ?

” we now only have to achieve the usual target “ will mean consistent top two form for the remainder of the season. For realism’s sake I think  the word ‘ only ‘ is best left out.

 

Edited January 13 by ......and Smith must score.

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,434]

So far 1.4 points per game . Getting this up to 2 pts per game unlikely . On course for 64/5 points which doesn’t usually get in the playoffs. 
Already dropped too many points at home to go up. 

[Indy 3,301]

To be honest I don’t think it matters much, Southampton will probably get second, Leeds will probably win the playoffs….but then again Luton went up last year!

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,822]

53 minutes ago, RobJames said:

or, based on current points total 46 games would have Coventry and Sunderland finishing on 68 points. Which massively scales back the usual thought total of 75 points as a minimum to finish 6th (another bit of bad news for the whiners)

It varies wildly. Sunderland got in on 69 last season, but it has been known for 78 to not be enough.

[AJ 1,223]

Players returning from injury should in theory help increase our points average but I can't say it'll matter much either way as we certainly aren't good enough to beat the likes of Leeds or Southampton in the playoffs over two legs. 

[Christoph Stiepermann 1,138]

These computer prediction tables always make me groan. They predict that every team will either be in the same position or one, maybe two places different basically to what they are on the day that the prediction is made...Really clever technology. If they do this prediction again after another two games every team in the middle of the pack will be predicated to finish in wildly different places. 

It's the Championship, if the table at the end of the season looks near identical to what it looks like now it would just be an astonishing co-incidence. 

[A Load of Squit 5,172]

They need a computer to look at the last 10 games and predict the final table?

 

[RobJames 881]

19 hours ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

So far 1.4 points per game . Getting this up to 2 pts per game unlikely . On course for 64/5 points which doesn’t usually get in the playoffs. 
Already dropped too many points at home to go up. 

Why do we need 2 points a game ?  All clubs below 5th are targetted to get 68 points or less. 1.6 points per game would have us on 69 points - 6th place. As stated, had we had Gunn not out I am certain we would have picked up a few more points which even three would now have us in the playoffs. And had Idah not missed yet another chance, it would have been more comfortable on Fri night than it might have looked.

One of the notable features of Lamberts promotions was the up and at 'em spirit, often in the last 10 minutes. over the top so to speak. What we are seeing is almost the opposite. A dogged defending of the trenches. They shall not pass, so to speak. Not so much 'mauled by the Tigers' but having the Tiger skinned and laid out as a rug to be walked over.

It's all to play for. Knock out the 'Gas' on Weds and it's a half million (?) payout in scouse land. Take the money and boost the front line with a decent young Pl loanee from the proceedings of that game. All to play for and enjoy for genuine City fans, and much to blub about for the whiners.

[......and Smith must score. 1,346]

On 13/01/2024 at 21:08, RobJames said:

………So despite our shaky season so far, we now only have to achieve the usual target (75) points in our next 19 games to be in an around 6th come May. All to play for, I would suggest.

 

4 hours ago, RobJames said:

Why do we need 2 points a game ?  All clubs below 5th are targetted to get 68 points or less. 1.6 points per game would have us on 69 points - 6th place. 

Why do we need 2 points a game ?  Because you said in the first post that we did ( lol )

Computer predictions are exactly that. Predictions. It’s not what always happens in real life.

[Indy 3,301]

This computer based prediction is for the last ten games, the next ten will probably have Southampton, Leeds, & Leicester top three, you can perm fourth spot from the next ten teams! The reality as you say Smith, lots of variables and teams go through loss / finding form! Personally I think we’ll be around 70 points by the end, around 10th as I thought at the start of the season and my three I predicted will go back up!

My only concern is the age of our squad and lack of development of more of the younger players.

Edited January 14 by Indy

[Drazen Muzinic 1,446]

[canarybubbles 1,923]

It all looks very sciency, with the exact figures down to a decimal point. But computers can only number crunch based on points accrued so far, making allowance for recent form and other stats such as xG. I suspect they still can't do what people do, such as add points because Team A has recently appointed a new manager who they rate highly or deduct points because someone they believe to be a key player has just suffered a long-term injury. Well, they can, but only if this subjective evaluation is input by a human being, and then the inputter is the decisive agent, not the machine. 

At least that's my amateur take on predictions such as this one, but I have to admit I have no background or knowledge of computing. Whether AI will eventually be able to do all of this without the fingers of a human being, I have no idea. Is there anyone on here who is working in that field? It would be interesting to hear an expert opinion on this.

[shefcanary 2,410]

5 hours ago, canarybubbles said:

Is there anyone on here who is working in that field? It would be interesting to hear an expert opinion on this.

I'm sure Attanasio has got his data guys working on it already!