Virtual prediction contest (Ahwaz Airport game #4)
in [World Football]
|
From: Clément on 21 Mar 2010 23:14 On Mar 21, 5:54 am, milivella wrote: > 1. What position would have Fulham reached in Premier League 2009-10? > (1st to 20th) > > The person whose prediction will be closer to reality will win. We > want an unique winner, so there is a tie-breaker question: > > 2. How many points will Fulham obtain in Premier League 2009-10? (0 to > 114) I'm afraid Mark(c)o.Fulham will disappoint its fans and finish 12th, with 44 points. Abraço, Luiz Mello
From: Jesus Petry on 22 Mar 2010 09:54 Fullmark will get 59 points and finnish 7th. Tchau! Jesus Petry
From: milivella on 24 Mar 2010 11:53 milivella: > Suppose that in July 2009 Fulham dropped all his players and bought > the aforementioned 44 players (actually Schwarzer already was at > Fulham). Nothing else in the world changes (e.g. not Fulham's staff > and budget). The question you have to answer is: > > 1. What position would have Fulham reached in Premier League 2009-10? > (1st to 20th) > > The person whose prediction will be closer to reality will win. We > want an unique winner, so there is a tie-breaker question: > > 2. How many points will Fulham obtain in Premier League 2009-10? (0 to > 114) > > You are free to predict (out of competition) about anything else: top > goalscorer, FA cup stage reached, best player, etc. > > Deadline for submitting predictions: Wednesday March 24, 09:00 GMT. Deadline has passed, and, for your convenience, here are the predictions submitted: 6th: Mark V. (68 points) 7th: Jesus Petry (59 points) 8th: El Kot (55 points) 11th: Futbolmetrix (47 points) 12th: Clément (44 points) So the winner for each final position that Fulham can obtain is: 1th-6th: Mark V. 7th: Jesus Petry 8th-9th: El Kot 10th-11th: Futbolmetrix 12th-18th: Clément Now you are expecting the results, aren't you? I am about to post them, but don't we want a bit of suspense? ;) I'll gradually post the monthly development of the virtual Premier League table. 1st update: September 16: Fulham is 18th. Don't you find it a bit dry? If so, dive in some data-filled screenshots: Played matches: http://i.imgur.com/OX1nx.jpg Competitions: - Premier League: http://i.imgur.com/EPhDJ.jpg - Europa League: http://i.imgur.com/ZfZs3.jpg - League Cup: http://i.imgur.com/m3b48.jpg Players' stats: - Goalkeepers: http://i.imgur.com/n1Udi.jpg - Defenders: http://i.imgur.com/9DJMM.jpg - Midfielders: http://i.imgur.com/Pp4aC.jpg - Attackers: http://i.imgur.com/MuEZU.jpg Chances are that you want some more information: feel free to ask. --- Disclaimer/Technical jargon: I'm simulating the season in Football Manager 2010, no patch, under the following settings: - Leagues: England - Premier Division - playable - Database size: Large - Matches in full detail (all matches): EURO Cup, Premier Division, FA Cup, League Cup - Start unemployed -- Cheers milivella
From: El Kot on 24 Mar 2010 15:07 milivella wrote: > > Now you are expecting the results, aren't you? I am about to post > them, but don't we want a bit of suspense? ;) I'll gradually post the > monthly development of the virtual Premier League table. > > 1st update: September 16: Fulham is 18th. We can use the interim EPL table to judge how good FM's simulation is. Frankly, I'm not impressed. You can compare the simulated table with the real one at Kicker: http://www.kicker.de/news/fussball/intligen/england/barclays-premier-league/2009-10/5/0/spieltag.html One would expect the Fulham results to be different from Fulmark's, but the rest of the teams should have performed in simulation more or less similar to reality. > Don't you find it a bit dry? If so, dive in some data-filled > screenshots: > Played matches: http://i.imgur.com/OX1nx.jpg > Competitions: > - Premier League: http://i.imgur.com/EPhDJ.jpg > - Europa League: http://i.imgur.com/ZfZs3.jpg > - League Cup: http://i.imgur.com/m3b48.jpg > Players' stats: > - Goalkeepers: http://i.imgur.com/n1Udi.jpg > - Defenders: http://i.imgur.com/9DJMM.jpg > - Midfielders: http://i.imgur.com/Pp4aC.jpg > - Attackers: http://i.imgur.com/MuEZU.jpg No wonder Fulmark's results are so bad - the simulated Hodgeson doesn't use his two strongest forwards - Janko and Pantelic... :) > Chances are that you want some more information: feel free to ask. > > --- > > Disclaimer/Technical jargon: I'm simulating the season in Football > Manager 2010, no patch, under the following settings: > - Leagues: England - Premier Division - playable > - Database size: Large > - Matches in full detail (all matches): EURO Cup, Premier Division, FA > Cup, League Cup > - Start unemployed What is "Start unemployed" ? -- No, no, you can't e-mail me with the nono.
From: milivella on 24 Mar 2010 17:04
El Kot: > We can use the interim EPL table to judge how good FM's simulation > is. Frankly, I'm not impressed. You can compare the simulated table with > the real one at Kicker: > > http://www.kicker.de/news/fussball/intligen/england/barclays-premier-... > > One would expect the Fulham results to be different from Fulmark's, but > the rest of the teams should have performed in simulation more or less > similar to reality. You are highlighting an interesting point. Leaving aside some banal considerations (e.g. a. the comparison will be most interesting at the end of the season, after 380 matches; b. you can have a bad simulation, or no simulation at all, and still produce a table that is similar to reality), I have some questions: 1. Is it correct to consider the real EPL table like a sample of teams' real value (rather than a perfect representation of it)? After all, one could say that, if Blackburn and Chelsea play 10 times, Chelsea would win 6 matches (random example), so their draw is like 1 of the other 4 matches, i.e. it's a sample of the 10 hypothetical matches between the two teams. 2. If the answer to (1) is "yes": we can compute a confidence interval, can't we? I.e. we can say "with a confidence level of 95%, Manchester United's real value measured in points per game is 2.23 (= 69 points / 31 matches) plus or minus x". 3. Things are of course easier in FM, because there we can simulate the same season a lot of times (I just have to remember to check the game after a couple of hours, save the standings and re-start the season). After having ran a lot of simulations and having averaged the results, we should be able to check if the simulated results are inside or outside the confidence interval mentioned at (2), so verifying/falsifying (in the limits of what it possible) FM's claims of realism. Am I wrong? > > Disclaimer/Technical jargon: I'm simulating the season in Football > > Manager 2010, no patch, under the following settings: > > - Leagues: England - Premier Division - playable > > - Database size: Large > > - Matches in full detail (all matches): EURO Cup, Premier Division, FA > > Cup, League Cup > > - Start unemployed > > What is "Start unemployed" ? It means that I'm not managing neither Fulham nor another team (something that could, in theory, "contaminate" the experiment). -- Cheers milivella |