The ravings of a clown.Moongoose McQueeen wrote:What happened to the millions to one odds????
Question for the statisticians
Re: RE: Re: Question for the statisticians
Re: Question for the statisticians
They must have agreed that figure in the meeting. Nice touch to include the picture of the workings out.
"Deserved Better"
GM, 2021.
GM, 2021.
Re: RE: Re: Question for the statisticians
It was sent over. Lives in an OL postcode, but not a shithole one like Rochdale.Rout wrote:They must have agreed that figure in the meeting. Nice touch to include the picture of the workings out.
Also, like you can understand the iteration anyway.
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Question for the statisticians
Thanks for the postcode update.DavidOwen67 wrote:It was sent over. Lives in an OL postcode, but not a shithole one like Rochdale.Rout wrote:They must have agreed that figure in the meeting. Nice touch to include the picture of the workings out.
Also, like you can understand the iteration anyway.
"Deserved Better"
GM, 2021.
GM, 2021.
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Question for the statisticians
^^^^ Seething.Rout wrote:Thanks for the postcode update.DavidOwen67 wrote:It was sent over. Lives in an OL postcode, but not a shithole one like Rochdale.Rout wrote:They must have agreed that figure in the meeting. Nice touch to include the picture of the workings out.
Also, like you can understand the iteration anyway.
Re: Question for the statisticians
Yes, I bet whoever lives in an OL postcode is very annoyed.
"Deserved Better"
GM, 2021.
GM, 2021.
Re: Question for the statisticians
1 in 576
Re: RE: Re: Question for the statisticians
Not in Uppermill, old chap.Rout wrote:Yes, I bet whoever lives in an OL postcode is very annoyed.
Re: Question for the statisticians
How did this go?Rout wrote:Some wonderful deflection tactics being used by Ginge here.
1 in 3 million hey. Let's focus on the discussion at hand. 1 in 3 million.
Re: RE: Re: Question for the statisticians
Exactly. Why do you think Rout us in full deflection mode?BlueSpark wrote:How did this go?Rout wrote:Some wonderful deflection tactics being used by Ginge here.
1 in 3 million hey. Let's focus on the discussion at hand. 1 in 3 million.
Re: Question for the statisticians
1 in 3 million are the odds of naming 2 players in advance of the weekend and THEN them drawing each other 3 times.
Hardly the odds of ANY 2 players being paired up 3 times.
Hardly the odds of ANY 2 players being paired up 3 times.
Re: RE: Re: Question for the statisticians
DesperateDavidOwen67 wrote:Exactly. Why do you think Rout us in full deflection mode?BlueSpark wrote:How did this go?Rout wrote:Some wonderful deflection tactics being used by Ginge here.
1 in 3 million hey. Let's focus on the discussion at hand. 1 in 3 million.
Re: Question for the statisticians
How did this go for you?BlueSpark wrote:My bet is that nothing is apparent and Rout has everyone getting their calculators out for no reason.
"Deserved Better"
GM, 2021.
GM, 2021.
Re: Question for the statisticians
1 in 576.Rout wrote:How did this go for you?BlueSpark wrote:My bet is that nothing is apparent and Rout has everyone getting their calculators out for no reason.
Let's let that sink in.
Re: RE: Re: Question for the statisticians
So, still no serious comment on the fact that your call of 3 million to 1 was out by a factor of 6000?Rout wrote:How did this go for you?BlueSpark wrote:My bet is that nothing is apparent and Rout has everyone getting their calculators out for no reason.
Re: Question for the statisticians
Well, this went well.
Re: Question for the statisticians
Someone looks a bit of a wallyMurphio wrote:Well, this went well.
Re: Question for the statisticians
So we then multiply by 127 or are we still ignoring a draw?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
"it's the same trolls spouting the same crap every other post.... you have to be some kind of sad act to watch nearly 8 hours of darts a day for 9 days just to post about how crap it is"
Madsocks
Madsocks
Re: Question for the statisticians
HNNNNNNNGGGGGG!!!!ifm wrote:So we then multiply by 127 or are we still ignoring a draw?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Big Jock Knew