one way to prove if the races are fixed or not is to check the odds against the results over periods of time!
do american results corespond to the odds in a consistent manner from year to year, generation to generation?
they do!
How to get in trouble as a cricket captain......?
-
matchstick
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 1:24 pm
- Contact:
[quote="mapoui"][/quote]
lets get the discussion back to cricket...
sort out your initial theory... or state that it was a mis judgement
lets get the discussion back to cricket...
sort out your initial theory... or state that it was a mis judgement
-
mapoui
- Posts: 8507
- Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 10:07 pm
wat are you talking about...wat misjudgement yu talking about! I have no idea wat you calculated. for all I know you could have been counting sheep in a meadow.
I know cricket! I have been following it for years! my opinion seems right to me. I will calculate it myself when I have the time to go through the stats
in the meantime if I am wrong I am wrong dats all. wat the hell are you demanding I admit to? did I commit a crime or something? its just cricket we talkng about!
I know cricket! I have been following it for years! my opinion seems right to me. I will calculate it myself when I have the time to go through the stats
in the meantime if I am wrong I am wrong dats all. wat the hell are you demanding I admit to? did I commit a crime or something? its just cricket we talkng about!
-
BallOil
- Posts: 19409
- Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 11:12 pm
mapoui wrote:wat are you talking about...wat misjudgement yu talking about! I have no idea wat you calculated. for all I know you could have been counting sheep in a meadow.
countng sheep... 
I think we need to break them stats down moe
Will try when I get a chance...unless you guys beat me to it...-
matchstick
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 1:24 pm
- Contact:
and proven wrong by the stats....mapoui wrote:
my opinion seems right to me.
Last edited by matchstick on Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
matchstick
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 1:24 pm
- Contact:
BallOil wrote:mapoui wrote:wat are you talking about...wat misjudgement yu talking about! I have no idea wat you calculated. for all I know you could have been counting sheep in a meadow.
I think we need to break them stats down moe
I would do it myself but it is a bit of a busy couple of weeks with work and the cricket thing etc...
Keep the thread going though.. i will eventually get to it if someone else don't...
-
mapoui
- Posts: 8507
- Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 10:07 pm
my contentiton that a fourth innings in a test matcg is the most difficult innings remains intact. it probably does not make sense to draw an inclusive line through test cricket for foruth innings, get a reasult and call it definitive.
there are distinctive facors that makes this the wrong thing to do to produce accurate results to qustions on the game.
for example until RSA joined up there were only two test nations. by the time westindies came along in 1928 there were 4 and only 3 played all the rest. by the end of the second world war when India joined up, then Pakistan in the fifties there were then 6 nations of which 5 played each other.
there was a give and take between Oz and england for a long time, until england dominated by the thirties of the last century. then Bradman arrived and there was a reverse.
westindies were a patsy on tour to England and Oz in the thirties. Pak and moreso India were patsies for a long time. Pak at home were always tough...from the start.
the first modern dynasty were the Oz from 1948 to '56. then there was an even period until westindioes rose by 1962. by 1968 westindies had passed and the Oz remerged, to be again surpassed for 20 years by the westindies in 1976.
the Oz rose up and dominated for the most part of the years from 1995 to currently.
the periods of domination are instructive. fourth innings were often formalities when the championship team batted second, when they were needed at all, most of these tests were one sided afairs when the fourth innings are counted have no bearing on my contention.
I remember instances when Nasser Hussean sent the Oz in to bat in Oz leading to an england loss of an inportan test just about the margin of the loss of that series if I recall correctly. westindies since our championship days have not won a single game if my recall ios accurate when sending in the oposition.
I seem to real also Smith of RSA doing the same thing and losing. all the instancs I reacl are of sides losing or ending up in serious difficulty when batting last. the scores of last innings of test matches are the lowest of all innings.
I will; get into it as soon as I can but there is absolutely nothing that contradicts my contention that the last innings of tests are to be avoided especially by teams that have no advantage to bats last...even teams that are evenly matched.
when you are champion you are champion. you defeat all others to become champion. you can afford to start from a deficit and overcome it repeatedly. althouigh I dont know anyone who looks to start from a deficit champion or not.
we must measure diffefrently to get an accurate picture of what the situation actually is for fourth inning in test match. no general, all inclusive line will do. thetstats rell a story that must be fleshd out by actual experience
there are distinctive facors that makes this the wrong thing to do to produce accurate results to qustions on the game.
for example until RSA joined up there were only two test nations. by the time westindies came along in 1928 there were 4 and only 3 played all the rest. by the end of the second world war when India joined up, then Pakistan in the fifties there were then 6 nations of which 5 played each other.
there was a give and take between Oz and england for a long time, until england dominated by the thirties of the last century. then Bradman arrived and there was a reverse.
westindies were a patsy on tour to England and Oz in the thirties. Pak and moreso India were patsies for a long time. Pak at home were always tough...from the start.
the first modern dynasty were the Oz from 1948 to '56. then there was an even period until westindioes rose by 1962. by 1968 westindies had passed and the Oz remerged, to be again surpassed for 20 years by the westindies in 1976.
the Oz rose up and dominated for the most part of the years from 1995 to currently.
the periods of domination are instructive. fourth innings were often formalities when the championship team batted second, when they were needed at all, most of these tests were one sided afairs when the fourth innings are counted have no bearing on my contention.
I remember instances when Nasser Hussean sent the Oz in to bat in Oz leading to an england loss of an inportan test just about the margin of the loss of that series if I recall correctly. westindies since our championship days have not won a single game if my recall ios accurate when sending in the oposition.
I seem to real also Smith of RSA doing the same thing and losing. all the instancs I reacl are of sides losing or ending up in serious difficulty when batting last. the scores of last innings of test matches are the lowest of all innings.
I will; get into it as soon as I can but there is absolutely nothing that contradicts my contention that the last innings of tests are to be avoided especially by teams that have no advantage to bats last...even teams that are evenly matched.
when you are champion you are champion. you defeat all others to become champion. you can afford to start from a deficit and overcome it repeatedly. althouigh I dont know anyone who looks to start from a deficit champion or not.
we must measure diffefrently to get an accurate picture of what the situation actually is for fourth inning in test match. no general, all inclusive line will do. thetstats rell a story that must be fleshd out by actual experience
-
mapoui
- Posts: 8507
- Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 10:07 pm
the 2 horse I thought were the best have both been scratched due to injury.
there is another possible suprise called american lion. he is fast, has one of the best pedigrees in the race, good form, and has drawn a post position that is very helpful.
the only problem I have with this horse is its probable rider David Flores who can be an idiot at times. he can be incompetent enough to spoil a race for a horse
the other major speed Sidneys Candy has drawn very poorly indeed with the #20 slot...just about eliminating his chances, unless he can rate well, get a decent position closer to the rail for most of the race, keep out of trouble and make a late run.
Lookin at Lucky should be in the results 1, 2 or 3 and 4.
here are some ohers in there with very decent pedigress whose sires are passing on their genes to their young. Super Saver from marias mon is one. Awesome Act from the canadian sire Awesome Again is another.
super Saver looks the better bet as Awesome Acts' win ratio does not impress. he has run 8 times for two wins. there arent too many excuses for a record like that, although ultimately, anything is possible.
so on my tri ticket I will play lookin at lucky and american lion to win for sure. I will probably play 3 horse on top depending on the odds...so I will add another to win with those two...probably super saver! some of the rest will be exotic fillers on the bet.
and another very interesting horse has lucked into the derby who must be considered. his name is backtalk, out of smarty jones on top and affirmed below. these are very decent pedigree lines here and this horse has a fine win ratio which suggests quality.
backtalk is a closer, very well draw in the 18 post position or thereabouts. the day at churchill is expected to be dry and hot. the weather has been dry for the last lil while so the track should be fast. if the speed materilaises as good and true, a quality closer may have a say at the end.
Back talk could be that horse. I am looking.......
there is another possible suprise called american lion. he is fast, has one of the best pedigrees in the race, good form, and has drawn a post position that is very helpful.
the only problem I have with this horse is its probable rider David Flores who can be an idiot at times. he can be incompetent enough to spoil a race for a horse
the other major speed Sidneys Candy has drawn very poorly indeed with the #20 slot...just about eliminating his chances, unless he can rate well, get a decent position closer to the rail for most of the race, keep out of trouble and make a late run.
Lookin at Lucky should be in the results 1, 2 or 3 and 4.
here are some ohers in there with very decent pedigress whose sires are passing on their genes to their young. Super Saver from marias mon is one. Awesome Act from the canadian sire Awesome Again is another.
super Saver looks the better bet as Awesome Acts' win ratio does not impress. he has run 8 times for two wins. there arent too many excuses for a record like that, although ultimately, anything is possible.
so on my tri ticket I will play lookin at lucky and american lion to win for sure. I will probably play 3 horse on top depending on the odds...so I will add another to win with those two...probably super saver! some of the rest will be exotic fillers on the bet.
and another very interesting horse has lucked into the derby who must be considered. his name is backtalk, out of smarty jones on top and affirmed below. these are very decent pedigree lines here and this horse has a fine win ratio which suggests quality.
backtalk is a closer, very well draw in the 18 post position or thereabouts. the day at churchill is expected to be dry and hot. the weather has been dry for the last lil while so the track should be fast. if the speed materilaises as good and true, a quality closer may have a say at the end.
Back talk could be that horse. I am looking.......
Last edited by mapoui on Fri Apr 30, 2010 5:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.