89 Points?

[cmonurz]

Snowball, if we finish 3 points ahead of Birmingham, why the presumption on your part that that three point gap results from our games with Birmingham?

I don't believe that question.

Answer Birmingham 1-3 Reading


You do agree we got 3 points and they got zero?

and if we beat them by three points, that means, over the other 45 games
we had identical points?

Go on, try thinking.

Why wouldn't that points differential relate to differences in performance against Blackpool? Birmingham have lost twice to Blackpool this season, 0 points. We beat them in our one game against them so far, 3 points. That's a difference of 3 points.

As above, why the presumption that a points difference relates to games between the teams?

The point is quite clear Snowball. We could beat Birmingham at the Madejski and enjoy 6 points off them this season, but if over the course of the remaining 44 games they score 7 more points than us, we're f*cked.

3rd +1.

[Snowball]

That, as I keep trying to explain is because they take points OFF the chasing pack

The bold part is what your stats don't show. That's pure conjecture. As a result, there's nothing in your analysis to show that a gap of six is required.

It's elementary to show you are wrong there.

There are 24 teams and when we play any team, if they are still theoretically
capable of beating our total points then they are still "in the chasing pack".


Every club currently below 59 points and still capable of 59 points is in the chasing pack

OR, any club capable of accumulating 70-75 points, more realistically because 70-73-73-74-75 has been enough
for a play-off place since 2001

Only Charlton in this league CANNOT reach the 70+ mark. Any one of those we take points off, is taking points off the chasing pack

Barnsley have 32 points from 30 games. They can still get 80 points. If we beat them then they can only get 77

Hence we have taken points of a chasing club.

There is only one match that is NOT against a chasing-pack club, and that's v Charlton.

Obviously the list of sides who cannot possibly make the play-offs will grow in the next few weeks
but until then, they are all in the chasing pack

[Snowball]

Snowball, if we finish 3 points ahead of Birmingham, why the presumption on your part that that three point gap results from our games with Birmingham?

I don't believe that question.

Answer Birmingham 1-3 Reading


You do agree we got 3 points and they got zero?

and if we beat them by three points, that means, over the other 45 games
we had identical points?

Go on, try thinking.

Why wouldn't that points differential relate to differences in performance against Blackpool? Birmingham have lost twice to Blackpool this season, 0 points. We beat them in our one game against them so far, 3 points. That's a difference of 3 points.

As above, why the presumption that a points difference relates to games between the teams?

The point is quite clear Snowball. We could beat Birmingham at the Madejski and enjoy 6 points off them this season, but if over the course of the remaining 44 games they score 7 more points than us, we're f*cked.

3rd +1.

Typical woman, changing the question. You asked a SPECIFIC question and said "If Reading beat Brum by exactly three points"

IF
Reading
beat
Birmingham
by
exactly
three points
to win promotion

then SPECIFICALLY, the game that took us up was defeating Birmingham at St Andrews.

That is so obvious!

[cmonurz]

Stop throwing insults, you're 61 ffs.

My point stands, and you didn't answer it.

And I didn't change the question at all. If we finish exactly 3 points ahead of Birmingham, it is not necessarily the case that the win over Birmingham took us up. What about the fact that Birmingham scored 0 points against Blackpool, and we got at least 3?

Reverse those results, and Birmingham go up irrespective of our win at St. Andrews.

What takes us up is the fact that we finish at least 1 point (or 1 goal!) ahead of Birmingham, no result in particular, because our league position is an aggregate of our performances across the season.

[Snowball]

The point is quite clear Snowball. We could beat Birmingham at the Madejski and enjoy 6 points off them this season, but if over the course of the remaining 44 games they score 7 more points than us, we're f*cked.

Let's see. 15 games to go and we are two points clear of them, OK...

We beat them a minimum of 1-0 so we are 5 points clear with 14 games.

They have to get six points more than us in 14 games (while we are doing enough to be 2nd/3rd) (at least 1.5 points a game

We get 21 points (plus the three) and end up on 83 points)

They have 14 games to get to 84 points from 57 = 27 points

Yes they could do it. It'll be amazing based on their form, and we will need to seriously LOSE form
to drop to 21 in 14, and in losing form 2-3 other sides would pass us, but...



3rd +1.

You are still VERY stupid...

average of second plus something for safety

[cmonurz]

That's all supposition. Your stats don't work. It doesn't matter how likely or not you think something is to happen, you are trying to provide a statistical solution to what we need to do this season. Therefore you have to take supposition out, and we need to finish one point ahead of 3rd.

Here's another example. Last season we were relegated on goal difference. Which match was the match that sealed our relegation?

By your logic, the game that sent us down was our home defeat to Fulham. Yet had we scored 1 more point in any of the games that we failed to win, we would have stayed up and Fulham would have been relegated.

[Snowball]

Stop throwing insults, you're 61 ffs.

My point stands, and you didn't answer it.

And I didn't change the question at all. If we finish exactly 3 points ahead of Birmingham, it is not necessarily the case that the win over Birmingham took us up. What about the fact that Birmingham scored 0 points against Blackpool, and we got at least 3?

Reverse those results, and Birmingham go up irrespective of our win at St. Andrews.

What takes us up is the fact that we finish at least 1 point (or 1 goal!) ahead of Birmingham, no result in particular, because our league position is an aggregate of our performances across the season.

Jesus, and you wonder why I call you stupid?

It's not an insult, it's a provable fact

Just for you, ignore the results at Sta Andrews

45 games... a load of points (say 83) Birmingham
45 games... a load of points (say 83) Reading

and imagine goals scored/against are identical

It's the last game of the season. If Reading win, only a moron could say they didn't go up "because they beat Birmingham in their last game"

Even you wouldn't say that, would you? Or WOULD you?



Now, try a different way of saying it.

45 games... a load of points (say 83) Birmingham
45 games... a load of points (say 83) Reading

and they kept the result of the game at St Andrews a secret.

Now they revel Reading won, so Reading go up.


If Birmingham had won that kept-secret game, THEY would go up

If it had been a draw Birmingham would go up

But Reading won, so Reading go up. Because (a) they got 3 and (b) Birmingham got nothing

[Hoop Blah]

You are very stupid.

For someone who started out trying to be such an intelligent informed poster who only dealt in facts and substantiated opinion you've very quickly shown yourself up!
What happened to your desire for informed debate and a wish for people to have grown up conversations instead of rants and entranched slagging matches?

Because people mostly seem capable of basic intelligence and basic analysis.

Question 1. Do you think I don't know that A+1 is greater than A?

Question 2. Do you think I don't know that 89 is more than 88?


Of course I do, but the 3rd +1 issue contains a huge error of logic, but it seems no-one on this list can see that.

OF COURSE it is true, that after 46 games, if we have one point more than the club in 3rd we will go up

But earlier in the thread people, people manipulated that after-the-fact fact, that TRUISM, and ERRONEOUSLY
believed that this meant, all you needed to do is look at the average for third place and add one point.

That's a false assumption. We have to meet and exceed the average that has been necessary for second.

It's not that long since 90 points was not enough for second.

My saying "You're stupid" is not an insult. It's a view of actuality based on reading posts.

I was actually thinking about a lot of your more recent posts not just the one I quoted.

Your average of second + a bit for safety is still totally baffling! It won't mean anything if another team get average of second + a bit for safety +1!!!!

[Snowball]

It's like communing with a brick

[cmonurz]

A load of guff about 'ignoring' our win over Birmingham at St. Andrews.

Fine. Now do exactly the same with matches against Blackpool this season. Now 'only a moron would say that we didn't go up thanks to our win/wins over Blackpool'.

[Skyline]

I had some time on my hands, so I thought I'd do a quick check back at the results between second and third over the years. It's easy to do on soccerbase.

Here's the numbers from the last 10 seasons for Second vs Third

98/99
Bradford 87
Ipswich 86
Bradford 0-0 Ipswich
Ipswich 3-0 Bradford
Net Pts: -3

99/00
Man City 89
Ipswich 87
Man City 1-0 Ipswich
Ipswich 2-1 Man City
Net Pts: 0

00/01
Blackburn 91
Bolton 87
Blackburn 1-1 Bolton
Bolton 1-4 Blackburn
Net Pts: +3

01/02
West Brom 89
Wolves 86
West Brom 1-1 Wolves
Wolves 0-1 West Brom
Net Pts: +3

02/03
Leicester 92
Sheff Utd 80
Leicester 0-0 Sheff Utd
Sheff Utd 2-1 Leicester
Net Pts: -3

03/04
West Brom 86
Sunderland 79
West Brom 0-0 Sunderland
Sunderland 0-1 West Brom
Net Pts: +3

04/05
Wigan 87
Ipswich 85
Wigan 1-0 Ipswich
Ipswich 2-1 Wigan
Net Pts: 0

05/06
Sheff Utd 90
Watford 81
Sheff Utd 1-4 Watford
Watford 2-3 Sheff Utd
Net Pts: 0

06/07
Birmingham 86
Derby 84
Birmingham 1-0 Derby
Derby 0-1 Birmingham
Net Pts: +6

07/08
Stoke 79
Hull 75
Stoke 1-1 Hull
Hull 1-1 Stoke
Net Pts: 0

So in those 10 years, the net points counts for the team in second are:

1 x +6
3 x +3
4 x 0
2 x -3

Winning margins broken down by net points counts are as follows:

+6 : 2
+3: 4, 3, 7
0: 2, 2, 9, 4
-3: 1, 12

If you work on the basis that the net points should effectively be doubled (because +1 point for one side is also effectively -1pt for the other), on three occasions out of the last 10 seasons the net points between 2nd and 3rd have been the difference in their positions.

[The 17 Bus]

The one thing that stands out on this thread was that someone managed 106 points 3 seasons ago,

[Skyline]

That, as I keep trying to explain is because they take points OFF the chasing pack

The bold part is what your stats don't show. That's pure conjecture. As a result, there's nothing in your analysis to show that a gap of six is required.

It's elementary to show you are wrong there.

There are 24 teams and when we play any team, if they are still theoretically
capable of beating our total points then they are still "in the chasing pack".


Every club currently below 59 points and still capable of 59 points is in the chasing pack

OR, any club capable of accumulating 70-75 points, more realistically because 70-73-73-74-75 has been enough
for a play-off place since 2001

Only Charlton in this league CANNOT reach the 70+ mark. Any one of those we take points off, is taking points off the chasing pack

Barnsley have 32 points from 30 games. They can still get 80 points. If we beat them then they can only get 77

Hence we have taken points of a chasing club.

There is only one match that is NOT against a chasing-pack club, and that's v Charlton.

Obviously the list of sides who cannot possibly make the play-offs will grow in the next few weeks
but until then, they are all in the chasing pack

So what you're saying is, is that we'll go up because we've taken points off the teams below us?

Isn't that, like, how the league works anyway?

[Mr Angry]

That, as I keep trying to explain is because they take points OFF the chasing pack

The bold part is what your stats don't show. That's pure conjecture. As a result, there's nothing in your analysis to show that a gap of six is required.

It's elementary to show you are wrong there.

There are 24 teams and when we play any team, if they are still theoretically
capable of beating our total points then they are still "in the chasing pack".


Every club currently below 59 points and still capable of 59 points is in the chasing pack

OR, any club capable of accumulating 70-75 points, more realistically because 70-73-73-74-75 has been enough
for a play-off place since 2001

Only Charlton in this league CANNOT reach the 70+ mark. Any one of those we take points off, is taking points off the chasing pack

Barnsley have 32 points from 30 games. They can still get 80 points. If we beat them then they can only get 77

Hence we have taken points of a chasing club.

There is only one match that is NOT against a chasing-pack club, and that's v Charlton.

Obviously the list of sides who cannot possibly make the play-offs will grow in the next few weeks
but until then, they are all in the chasing pack

Made a schoolboy error there; what you are saying would be correct if ALL teams could get 3 points from ALL their remaining games - spot the problem with that theory???

Yep - the other teams HAVE TO PLAY EACH OTHER, so to say that EVERY team other than Charlton can catch us is rubbish; a more accurate description would be that ANY team could catch us, and even more accurate would be "Teams X, Y and Z have a greater probability of catching us than Teams A, B or C".

I would be willing to have a bet with anyone on this board right now that DEFINATELY no team below Swansea will get more points than we will get this season, and another bet that the only 3 teams that might get more points than us are Wolves, Brum and Cardiff.

In other words, the "chasing pack" realistically, are Brum, Cardiff, Sheff Utd, Preston and Swansea.

And its their results we have to watch out for, and hope that, when they play each other, they draw.

[Ian Royal]

Once again you can't get into trying to work out what happens is certain points from certain games go in certain ways. That essentially involves simulating every game in the championship to rerun an imaginary league table which helps no one.

The simple FACT is that you only have to have a better goal difference with the same points/more points than a team in any position to finish above them. Just because second has gone up with a, b or c points over the last few seasons does not mean that those were the points required for them to come second.

We did not require 106 points to finish 1st in 05/06. TO work out what is needed to finish 2nd you look at what the target to beat in each season was. Which is the points and GD of the team in 3rd. As Simple as things can possibly get.

Any other way of looking at it requires number crunching computers, individual games being looked at and the entire thing being guestimated. Which won't give you any reliable information.

[RobRoyal]

You are very stupid.

THIS CENTURY no club in second has beaten third by a single point.

Please explain, oh wise one, why the historical spread of second place teams has any impact on what Reading, this season, are required to get. If over the last 10 years 2nd place teams had all got 100 points and beaten 3rd by 20 points, would it be reasonable to surmise that Reading, this season, need to get 100 points to go up automatically?

I'll try to hold back on returning the insult, largely because I feel sorry for you. Going on this forum and getting your arse handed to you every time you post. It can't be fun.

[Y25]

I think the automatics will need at least 89 to go up.

With 15 games to go we would need to win 10 of them to do that

Should be a piece of piss

[Sun Tzu]

I think the automatics will need at least 89 to go up.

With 15 games to go we would need to win 10 of them to do that

Should be a piece of piss

It's easier for us than for anyone else....

[Arch]

That, as I keep trying to explain is because they take points OFF the chasing pack

The bold part is what your stats don't show. That's pure conjecture. As a result, there's nothing in your analysis to show that a gap of six is required.

It's elementary to show you are wrong there.

There are 24 teams and when we play any team, if they are still theoretically
capable of beating our total points then they are still "in the chasing pack".


Every club currently below 59 points and still capable of 59 points is in the chasing pack

OR, any club capable of accumulating 70-75 points, more realistically because 70-73-73-74-75 has been enough
for a play-off place since 2001

Only Charlton in this league CANNOT reach the 70+ mark. Any one of those we take points off, is taking points off the chasing pack

Barnsley have 32 points from 30 games. They can still get 80 points. If we beat them then they can only get 77

Hence we have taken points of a chasing club.

There is only one match that is NOT against a chasing-pack club, and that's v Charlton.

Obviously the list of sides who cannot possibly make the play-offs will grow in the next few weeks
but until then, they are all in the chasing pack

That doesn't show I'm wrong at all. Your claim was that taking points off the chasing pack explains why there's a significant gap between second and third. Given the way you've trivialized the concept of chasing pack, that doesn't follow at all. There needs to be a gap of one point or an advantage in GD. Explain how the mere fact of taking points off the chasing pack, given your account of it in this post, leads statistically to a 5.6 point gap between second and third, because that's a causal connection you've drawn.

[Victor Meldrew]

As Mr A responded to Snowball (I'm good at spelling but no good when 3 quotes are exceeded).

That, as I keep trying to explain is because they take points OFF the chasing pack

[/quote]The bold part is what your stats don't show. That's pure conjecture. As a result, there's nothing in your analysis to show that a gap of six is required.[/quote]

It's elementary to show you are wrong there.

There are 24 teams and when we play any team, if they are still theoretically
capable of beating our total points then they are still "in the chasing pack".


Every club currently below 59 points and still capable of 59 points is in the chasing pack

OR, any club capable of accumulating 70-75 points, more realistically because 70-73-73-74-75 has been enough
for a play-off place since 2001

Only Charlton in this league CANNOT reach the 70+ mark. Any one of those we take points off, is taking points off the chasing pack

Barnsley have 32 points from 30 games. They can still get 80 points. If we beat them then they can only get 77

Hence we have taken points of a chasing club.

There is only one match that is NOT against a chasing-pack club, and that's v Charlton.

Obviously the list of sides who cannot possibly make the play-offs will grow in the next few weeks
but until then, they are all in the chasing pack[/quote]

MrA replied:-

Made a schoolboy error there; what you are saying would be correct if ALL teams could get 3 points from ALL their remaining games - spot the problem with that theory???

Yep - the other teams HAVE TO PLAY EACH OTHER, so to say that EVERY team other than Charlton can catch us is rubbish; a more accurate description would be that ANY team could catch us, and even more accurate would be "Teams X, Y and Z have a greater probability of catching us than Teams A, B or C".

I would be willing to have a bet with anyone on this board right now that DEFINATELY no team below Swansea will get more points than we will get this season, and another bet that the only 3 teams that might get more points than us are Wolves, Brum and Cardiff.

In other words, the "chasing pack" realistically, are Brum, Cardiff, Sheff Utd, Preston and Swansea.

And its their results we have to watch out for, and hope that, when they play each other, they draw.[/quote]

Victor then wisely wrote:-

I'm not in the same league as Spacey but I do find it difficult to take any post seriously when facts and mathematical probabilities are banded about with great aplomb but STILL the word "definitely is mis-spelt especially when definitives are part of the debate.
As I see it we are much more likely than not to finish in the top 4 .