Trying a new visualisation, because I wanted to add the hospital occupancy levels AND a comparison with the September/October second wave.
I've started this wave at the low point (the 7-day-average of cases bottomed out on 3rd of May). I started the second wave at the point where its seven-day average of cases was the same (which happened to be the 30th of August).
(Second wave chosen because the first wave did not have sufficient measuring of cases, and the December/January wave built on the preceding September/October wave without time to allow hospital admissions to drop - and the cases numbers never did drop to comparable levels, anyway)
Multi-coloured graphs show cases-to-hospitalisations over the same period of elapsed time, with hospitalisations lagged 7 days from cases. The grey graphs beneath show hospital occupancy against those dates.
(NB: It should be borne in mind that: 1 - The situation on the right is with far fewer restrictions than the one on the left 2 - The variant circulating on the right is far more infections and spreads more quickly 3 - The variant on the right is twice as likely to hospitalise someone than the one on the left
Looks like vaccines work)
I like it!
I should probably emphasise that:
- Cases are on the same scale left and right - Hospitalisations are on the same scale left and right (and scaled such that the 7-day average of hospitalisations on the current wave start at the same height as the 7-day average of cases) - Hospital occupancy is on the same scale left and right
In the last five years, the number of data points available to football teams has gone from 4000 per game to four million. I wrote about the football data revolution, and how it could be a key factor in England v Germany, for @wireduk #ENGGER
I know sports data has always been used, but for some reason that level of analytics depresses me.
You should see what they do with the likes of baseball and NBA now....cricket is now fast catching up. Football is actually still a laggard.
Baseball and cricket strike me as a lot more quantifiable than football. In fact, I can think of few sports which are less obviously quantifiable than football. So you completed a pass - how godo a pass was it? So you made a shot on target - did it cause the goalie any difficulty? And so forth.
It is more difficult, but it is absolutely possible. I would need to give you a multi-hour powerpoint lecture to explain some of it.
Liverpool already have probabilistic models that they can show players given their position vs particular defensive setups, what is the optimal action / area to run to...and then when they get their, what is the next optimal action. And this isn't at point A, now point B, this is as the player moves across the pitch.
e.g. it is widely now excepted at the highest level the old idea of "down the wing, whip it in the box" is a generally a poor tactical approach, and has been shown via these models.
Surely it comes down to what the player is good at? I generally agree that if you can play like Barcelona c.2008-12, then that is probably the optimal approach to the game, but if you have David Beckham and Ruud van Nistelrooy, then crosses into the box are pretty good approach too.
Sienna Rogers (editor of Labour List) is always worth listening to as a frank friend of Labour - here's her Batley and Spen report, with some new sidelights, basically repeating the message that Labour probably won't win but just about might. Leadbeater's appeal in the Tory/LibDem area is something I've not seen discussed before, but I did encounter a couple of Tory-Labour switchers and the 3 LibDems who were all switching exclusively on personal grounds (i.e. voting for Kim).
Betfair's prices have Labour moving in (as I write) to 4.8 and the Tories out to 1.29, but still a very thin market. The Lab-Galloway Ladbrokes market is back out to 1/7.
The article pulls its punches markedly on the subject of where threats of violence, physical assaults, and hostility to LGBT ('a Birmingham activist') is coming from.
From the article:
A Tory voter: “Labour to me are spend, spend, spend and don’t care about what’s happening in future, they just want to spend money. "
Bloody hilarious. Have they seen our borrowing figures under Johnson? Or noticed that the Bank of England buys all the government debt?
In the last five years, the number of data points available to football teams has gone from 4000 per game to four million. I wrote about the football data revolution, and how it could be a key factor in England v Germany, for @wireduk #ENGGER
I know sports data has always been used, but for some reason that level of analytics depresses me.
You should see what they do with the likes of baseball and NBA now....cricket is now fast catching up. Football is actually still a laggard.
Baseball and cricket strike me as a lot more quantifiable than football. In fact, I can think of few sports which are less obviously quantifiable than football. So you completed a pass - how godo a pass was it? So you made a shot on target - did it cause the goalie any difficulty? And so forth.
It is more difficult, but it is absolutely possible. I would need to give you a multi-hour powerpoint lecture to explain some of it.
Liverpool already have probabilistic models that they can show players given their position vs particular defensive setups, what is the optimal action / area to run to...and then when they get their, what is the next optimal action. And this isn't at point A, now point B, this is as the player moves across the pitch.
e.g. it is widely now excepted at the highest level the old idea of "down the wing, whip it in the box" is a generally a poor tactical approach, and has been shown via these models.
I know for a fact that some companies pay people to watch recent football matches and record quantitive information which covers questions like "how good a pass was it?".
Do it properly, consistently and for enough matches, then a lot of profit can be made out of it.
Yes StatsBomb have a whole team in Egypt that do this. There are a number of other companies who do this. Its a brutal job, with high rates of burn out.
But the computer models increasingly don't even need a human to write that down, it can be inferred from the data.
Sienna Rogers (editor of Labour List) is always worth listening to as a frank friend of Labour - here's her Batley and Spen report, with some new sidelights, basically repeating the message that Labour probably won't win but just about might. Leadbeater's appeal in the Tory/LibDem area is something I've not seen discussed before, but I did encounter a couple of Tory-Labour switchers and the 3 LibDems who were all switching exclusively on personal grounds (i.e. voting for Kim).
Betfair's prices have Labour moving in (as I write) to 4.8 and the Tories out to 1.29, but still a very thin market. The Lab-Galloway Ladbrokes market is back out to 1/7.
The article pulls its punches markedly on the subject of where threats of violence, physical assaults, and hostility to LGBT ('a Birmingham activist') is coming from.
From the article:
A Tory voter: “Labour to me are spend, spend, spend and don’t care about what’s happening in future, they just want to spend money. "
Bloody hilarious. Have they seen our borrowing figures under Johnson? Or noticed that the Bank of England buys all the government debt?
The UK has pretty much always borrowed during recessions and wars etc, why should this one be any different to you?
The difference is that the Tories are alert to the borrowing figures and Sunak has already addressed Parliament on how he intends to get them back down again.
In the last five years, the number of data points available to football teams has gone from 4000 per game to four million. I wrote about the football data revolution, and how it could be a key factor in England v Germany, for @wireduk #ENGGER
I know sports data has always been used, but for some reason that level of analytics depresses me.
You should see what they do with the likes of baseball and NBA now....cricket is now fast catching up. Football is actually still a laggard.
Baseball and cricket strike me as a lot more quantifiable than football. In fact, I can think of few sports which are less obviously quantifiable than football. So you completed a pass - how godo a pass was it? So you made a shot on target - did it cause the goalie any difficulty? And so forth.
It is more difficult, but it is absolutely possible. I would need to give you a multi-hour powerpoint lecture to explain some of it.
Liverpool already have probabilistic models that they can show players given their position vs particular defensive setups, what is the optimal action / area to run to...and then when they get their, what is the next optimal action. And this isn't at point A, now point B, this is as the player moves across the pitch.
e.g. it is widely now excepted at the highest level the old idea of "down the wing, whip it in the box" is a generally a poor tactical approach, and has been shown via these models.
Surely it comes down to what the player is good at? I generally agree that if you can play like Barcelona c.2008-12, then that is probably the optimal approach to the game, but if you have David Beckham and Ruud van Nistelrooy, then crosses into the box are pretty good approach too.
No, not really. At the highest level of modern football, you build your tactics, and find players to fill those roles.
It has been demonstrated from millions of matches that a more consistently dangerous approach is to be working the ball in from the flanks into the central areas in and around the box, looking to then slip runners in. You are giving yourself more opportunities for more shots from areas with a higher expected return.
That isn't to say you never go wide, but it is an inferior option overall.
Its the same with the long range shot, it has been shown the probability of scoring is far too low compared to the other options. Now if the defence always just backs right off and gives you an age to shoot, then yes you do try some attempts, but the primary approach should always be to advance the ball closer and more central to the goal.
Basketball had the same revolution about 5 years ago. Now the general tactics is either shot from very close to the net for 2, or kick it out for 3. You rarely go for the mid-ranged 2 point shot, you are losing expected value by doing so on average.
Remember Sturgeon strongly advising against travel to London? No, me neither:
THE surge in coronavirus cases is partly linked to football fans watching the Euro 2020 tournament indoors, Scotland's Health Secretary Humza Yousaf has said.
A number of cases have also been linked to coaches transporting fans to London to watch Scotland play, Mr Yousaf added.
In the last five years, the number of data points available to football teams has gone from 4000 per game to four million. I wrote about the football data revolution, and how it could be a key factor in England v Germany, for @wireduk #ENGGER
I know sports data has always been used, but for some reason that level of analytics depresses me.
The amount of hard disk space taken up with utterly trivial data must be immense. Thousands of gig of data that will all be irrelevant in ten years time.
Sienna Rogers (editor of Labour List) is always worth listening to as a frank friend of Labour - here's her Batley and Spen report, with some new sidelights, basically repeating the message that Labour probably won't win but just about might. Leadbeater's appeal in the Tory/LibDem area is something I've not seen discussed before, but I did encounter a couple of Tory-Labour switchers and the 3 LibDems who were all switching exclusively on personal grounds (i.e. voting for Kim).
Betfair's prices have Labour moving in (as I write) to 4.8 and the Tories out to 1.29, but still a very thin market. The Lab-Galloway Ladbrokes market is back out to 1/7.
The article pulls its punches markedly on the subject of where threats of violence, physical assaults, and hostility to LGBT ('a Birmingham activist') is coming from.
From the article:
A Tory voter: “Labour to me are spend, spend, spend and don’t care about what’s happening in future, they just want to spend money. "
Bloody hilarious. Have they seen our borrowing figures under Johnson? Or noticed that the Bank of England buys all the government debt?
The UK has pretty much always borrowed during recessions and wars etc, why should this one be any different to you?
The difference is that the Tories are alert to the borrowing figures and Sunak has already addressed Parliament on how he intends to get them back down again.
The borrowing has been so colossal that all he has done is put some sticky plaster over the problem....
In the last five years, the number of data points available to football teams has gone from 4000 per game to four million. I wrote about the football data revolution, and how it could be a key factor in England v Germany, for @wireduk #ENGGER
I know sports data has always been used, but for some reason that level of analytics depresses me.
The amount of hard disk space taken up with utterly trivial data must be immense. Thousands of gig of data that will all be irrelevant in ten years time.
Not really. Storage is dirt cheap these days, especially with the cloud. The sort of level of data storage required for sports analytics is absolutely tiny compared to many other operations.
They estimate the overall infection fatality rate (IFR) of coronavirus has been driven down to 0.085 per cent. In the most vulnerable over-75s group, the IFR is now thought to be under 2 per cent after plummeting from 17 per cent during the winter peak in January.
This doesn't take any account for vaccine status of those dying or any other conditions.
It would be interesting to know if you stripped out unvaccinated what it would be? Then stripped out people who are 95 year olds with 27 other terrible underlying conditions meaning that they are incredibly vulnerable to dying from basically anything.
In the last five years, the number of data points available to football teams has gone from 4000 per game to four million. I wrote about the football data revolution, and how it could be a key factor in England v Germany, for @wireduk #ENGGER
I know sports data has always been used, but for some reason that level of analytics depresses me.
The amount of hard disk space taken up with utterly trivial data must be immense. Thousands of gig of data that will all be irrelevant in ten years time.
Not really. Storage is dirt cheap these days, especially with the cloud. The sort of level of data storage required for sports analytics is absolutely tiny compared to many other operations.
The upside is that even with 4 million pieces of data, predicting the result of matches is seemingly impossible. Or any other event in the game on which there is a betting market. If the analytics point is depressing, then the ability of England to score only half their expected goals is a relief.
In the last five years, the number of data points available to football teams has gone from 4000 per game to four million. I wrote about the football data revolution, and how it could be a key factor in England v Germany, for @wireduk #ENGGER
I know sports data has always been used, but for some reason that level of analytics depresses me.
The amount of hard disk space taken up with utterly trivial data must be immense. Thousands of gig of data that will all be irrelevant in ten years time.
If there's one thing the world doesn't struggle with its finding gigabytes to store data.
In ten years time machines will be capable of handling petabytes of data.
Indeed already today the data in the cloud has exceeded an Exabyte.
In the last five years, the number of data points available to football teams has gone from 4000 per game to four million. I wrote about the football data revolution, and how it could be a key factor in England v Germany, for @wireduk #ENGGER
I know sports data has always been used, but for some reason that level of analytics depresses me.
The amount of hard disk space taken up with utterly trivial data must be immense. Thousands of gig of data that will all be irrelevant in ten years time.
Not really. Storage is dirt cheap these days, especially with the cloud. The sort of level of data storage required for sports analytics is absolutely tiny compared to many other operations.
The upside is that even with 4 million pieces of data, predicting the result of matches is seemingly impossible. Or any other event in the game on which there is a betting market. If the analytics point is depressing, then the ability of England to score only half their expected goals is a relief.
Tony Bloom and Matthew Benham wave from their massive yachts. They have both made so much money out of being able to do exactly this, they now own premier league football clubs.
Brady is an interesting one. His success at quarterbacking NFL isn't I think because he's the most talented (His draft was famously terrible) but because he does precisely what's needed when it's needed. He's basically got the world's best quarterback analytics % brain built in. Teams don't find this sort of player that often nowadays because they rely on the stats team to direct around selecting for raw talent; but it still has a massive value - it won't show at a combine mind.
In the last five years, the number of data points available to football teams has gone from 4000 per game to four million. I wrote about the football data revolution, and how it could be a key factor in England v Germany, for @wireduk #ENGGER
I know sports data has always been used, but for some reason that level of analytics depresses me.
The amount of hard disk space taken up with utterly trivial data must be immense. Thousands of gig of data that will all be irrelevant in ten years time.
Not really. Storage is dirt cheap these days, especially with the cloud. The sort of level of data storage required for sports analytics is absolutely tiny compared to many other operations.
There's so much data gathered and generated in meteorology that I think it still makes sense for them to use tape storage.
In the last five years, the number of data points available to football teams has gone from 4000 per game to four million. I wrote about the football data revolution, and how it could be a key factor in England v Germany, for @wireduk #ENGGER
I know sports data has always been used, but for some reason that level of analytics depresses me.
You should see what they do with the likes of baseball and NBA now....cricket is now fast catching up. Football is actually still a laggard.
Baseball and cricket strike me as a lot more quantifiable than football. In fact, I can think of few sports which are less obviously quantifiable than football. So you completed a pass - how godo a pass was it? So you made a shot on target - did it cause the goalie any difficulty? And so forth.
It is more difficult, but it is absolutely possible. I would need to give you a multi-hour powerpoint lecture to explain some of it.
Liverpool already have probabilistic models that they can show players given their position vs particular defensive setups, what is the optimal action / area to run to...and then when they get their, what is the next optimal action. And this isn't at point A, now point B, this is as the player moves across the pitch.
e.g. it is widely now excepted at the highest level the old idea of "down the wing, whip it in the box" is a generally a poor tactical approach, and has been shown via these models.
Surely it comes down to what the player is good at? I generally agree that if you can play like Barcelona c.2008-12, then that is probably the optimal approach to the game, but if you have David Beckham and Ruud van Nistelrooy, then crosses into the box are pretty good approach too.
No, not really. At the highest level of modern football, you build your tactics, and find players to fill those roles.
It has been demonstrated from millions of matches that a more consistently dangerous approach is to be working the ball in from the flanks into the central areas in and around the box, looking to then slip runners in. You are giving yourself more opportunities for more shots from areas with a higher expected return.
That isn't to say you never go wide, but it is an inferior option overall.
Its the same with the long range shot, it has been shown the probability of scoring is far too low compared to the other options. Now if the defence always just backs right off and gives you an age to shoot, then yes you do try some attempts, but the primary approach should always be to advance the ball closer and more central to the goal.
Basketball had the same revolution about 5 years ago. Now the general tactics is either shot from very close to the net for 2, or kick it out for 3. You rarely go for the mid-ranged 2 point shot, you are losing expected value by doing so on average.
I know your response to this will be "yeah, but international football is a bit shit", but worth noting that three of the goals scored yesterday came from really good crosses. The first Hungary goal against Germany the other night was a fantastic cross from deep.
The reason it's quite a good tactic is that it creates gaps between the defenders. If the delivery is right it's almost impossible to do anything about it. There was a Man Utd game under Moyes when they just lumped balls into the box and he got a lot of stick for it, but it is still an important part of attacking in my opinion.
Brady is an interesting one. His success at quarterbacking NFL isn't I think because he's the most talented (His draft was famously terrible) but because he does precisely what's needed when it's needed. He's basically got the world's best quarterback analytics % brain built in. Teams don't find this sort of player that often nowadays because they rely on the stats team to direct around selecting for raw talent; but it still has a massive value - it won't show at a combine mind.
That might be because they are testing the wrong thing for a QB at the combine. So many of the combine tests are irreverent for that incredibly specialist position e.g. it doesn't matter one bit how much they can benchpress.
Its a bit like worrying a football club concerning themselves with how fast a goalie can sprint a 100m....
Remember, that was the whole thing about "moneyball". It wasn't that baseball didn't do any analytics, it was they did the wrong analytics.
NFL is weird. They employ masses of big brain nerds to crunch data, and for instance they demonstrated to the coaches repeatedly that going for it on 4th down is overall +ve approach, and at the very least they should be doing it a lot more....the coaches for the most part have ignored this advice for years now.
There is a college coach has even being the A/B tester for this, who goes for it loads and shown good success, even though he over does it and the opposition know he does.
In the last five years, the number of data points available to football teams has gone from 4000 per game to four million. I wrote about the football data revolution, and how it could be a key factor in England v Germany, for @wireduk #ENGGER
I know sports data has always been used, but for some reason that level of analytics depresses me.
The amount of hard disk space taken up with utterly trivial data must be immense. Thousands of gig of data that will all be irrelevant in ten years time.
Not really. Storage is dirt cheap these days, especially with the cloud. The sort of level of data storage required for sports analytics is absolutely tiny compared to many other operations.
The upside is that even with 4 million pieces of data, predicting the result of matches is seemingly impossible. Or any other event in the game on which there is a betting market. If the analytics point is depressing, then the ability of England to score only half their expected goals is a relief.
Tony Bloom and Matthew Benham wave from their massive yachts. They have both made so much money out of being able to do exactly this, they now own premier league football clubs.
And all of their employees and clients are waving too, who have been invited along for a free cruise.
Sienna Rogers (editor of Labour List) is always worth listening to as a frank friend of Labour - here's her Batley and Spen report, with some new sidelights, basically repeating the message that Labour probably won't win but just about might. Leadbeater's appeal in the Tory/LibDem area is something I've not seen discussed before, but I did encounter a couple of Tory-Labour switchers and the 3 LibDems who were all switching exclusively on personal grounds (i.e. voting for Kim).
Betfair's prices have Labour moving in (as I write) to 4.8 and the Tories out to 1.29, but still a very thin market. The Lab-Galloway Ladbrokes market is back out to 1/7.
The article pulls its punches markedly on the subject of where threats of violence, physical assaults, and hostility to LGBT ('a Birmingham activist') is coming from.
From the article:
A Tory voter: “Labour to me are spend, spend, spend and don’t care about what’s happening in future, they just want to spend money. "
Bloody hilarious. Have they seen our borrowing figures under Johnson? Or noticed that the Bank of England buys all the government debt?
The UK has pretty much always borrowed during recessions and wars etc, why should this one be any different to you?
The difference is that the Tories are alert to the borrowing figures and Sunak has already addressed Parliament on how he intends to get them back down again.
Massive tax increases in wealth creating southern tory constituencies? What else is there?
They estimate the overall infection fatality rate (IFR) of coronavirus has been driven down to 0.085 per cent. In the most vulnerable over-75s group, the IFR is now thought to be under 2 per cent after plummeting from 17 per cent during the winter peak in January.
This doesn't take any account for vaccine status of those dying or any other conditions.
It would be interesting to know if you stripped out unvaccinated what it would be? Then stripped out people who are 95 year olds with 27 other terrible underlying conditions meaning that they are incredibly vulnerable to dying from basically anything.
For me, personally, I thought that an IFR of around 0.1% was the threshold between a disease that was dangerous enough to justify a national emergency response, and one that isn't. So, glad to see that it's now below that for the country as a whole.
Would be interesting to see the numbers for the vaccinated alone (but you'd probably need to adjust for different vaccination tastes in different age groups), but I don't think it makes sense to strip out the very old and infirm. They're a valid part of a population average.
Brady is an interesting one. His success at quarterbacking NFL isn't I think because he's the most talented (His draft was famously terrible) but because he does precisely what's needed when it's needed. He's basically got the world's best quarterback analytics % brain built in. Teams don't find this sort of player that often nowadays because they rely on the stats team to direct around selecting for raw talent; but it still has a massive value - it won't show at a combine mind.
That might be because they are testing the wrong thing for a QB at the combine. So many of the combine tests are irreverent for that incredibly specialist position e.g. it doesn't matter one bit how much they can benchpress.
Its a bit like worrying a football club concerning themselves with how fast a goalie can sprint a 100m....
On your latter point, that's something Liverpool track when assessing a goalie, is something useful considering the high line Liverpool play with and the gorgeous bastard Alisson Becker playing as a sweeper at time.
Sienna Rogers (editor of Labour List) is always worth listening to as a frank friend of Labour - here's her Batley and Spen report, with some new sidelights, basically repeating the message that Labour probably won't win but just about might. Leadbeater's appeal in the Tory/LibDem area is something I've not seen discussed before, but I did encounter a couple of Tory-Labour switchers and the 3 LibDems who were all switching exclusively on personal grounds (i.e. voting for Kim).
Betfair's prices have Labour moving in (as I write) to 4.8 and the Tories out to 1.29, but still a very thin market. The Lab-Galloway Ladbrokes market is back out to 1/7.
The article pulls its punches markedly on the subject of where threats of violence, physical assaults, and hostility to LGBT ('a Birmingham activist') is coming from.
From the article:
A Tory voter: “Labour to me are spend, spend, spend and don’t care about what’s happening in future, they just want to spend money. "
Bloody hilarious. Have they seen our borrowing figures under Johnson? Or noticed that the Bank of England buys all the government debt?
The UK has pretty much always borrowed during recessions and wars etc, why should this one be any different to you?
The difference is that the Tories are alert to the borrowing figures and Sunak has already addressed Parliament on how he intends to get them back down again.
Massive tax increases in wealth creating southern tory constituencies? What else is there?
Massive tax increases on people who refuse to get their vaccine promptly, ditto antivaxxers.
Brady is an interesting one. His success at quarterbacking NFL isn't I think because he's the most talented (His draft was famously terrible) but because he does precisely what's needed when it's needed. He's basically got the world's best quarterback analytics % brain built in. Teams don't find this sort of player that often nowadays because they rely on the stats team to direct around selecting for raw talent; but it still has a massive value - it won't show at a combine mind.
That might be because they are testing the wrong thing for a QB at the combine. So many of the combine tests are irreverent for that incredibly specialist position e.g. it doesn't matter one bit how much they can benchpress.
Its a bit like worrying a football club concerning themselves with how fast a goalie can sprint a 100m....
On your latter point, that's something Liverpool track when assessing a goalie, is something useful considering the high line Liverpool play with and the gorgeous bastard Alisson Becker playing as a sweeper at time.
100m? Really? Short sprints I can see, 100m? Why do you care basically what their long range top speed is? They are never going to get any opportunity to get near that.
Brady is an interesting one. His success at quarterbacking NFL isn't I think because he's the most talented (His draft was famously terrible) but because he does precisely what's needed when it's needed. He's basically got the world's best quarterback analytics % brain built in. Teams don't find this sort of player that often nowadays because they rely on the stats team to direct around selecting for raw talent; but it still has a massive value - it won't show at a combine mind.
That might be because they are testing the wrong thing for a QB at the combine. So many of the combine tests are irreverent for that incredibly specialist position e.g. it doesn't matter one bit how much they can benchpress.
Its a bit like worrying a football club concerning themselves with how fast a goalie can sprint a 100m....
Remember, that was the whole thing about "moneyball". It wasn't that baseball didn't do any analytics, it was they did the wrong analytics.
NFL is weird. They employ masses of big brain nerds to crunch data, and for instance they demonstrated to the coaches repeatedly that going for it on 4th down is overall +ve approach, and at the very least they should be doing it a lot more....the coaches for the most part have ignored this.
There is a college coach has even being the A/B tester for this, who goes for it loads and shown good success, even though he over does it and the opposition know he does.
I think teams go for it on fourth down a lot more these days. Perhaps not as often as they should, but they do. This was one was very ballsy:
Brady is an interesting one. His success at quarterbacking NFL isn't I think because he's the most talented (His draft was famously terrible) but because he does precisely what's needed when it's needed. He's basically got the world's best quarterback analytics % brain built in. Teams don't find this sort of player that often nowadays because they rely on the stats team to direct around selecting for raw talent; but it still has a massive value - it won't show at a combine mind.
I do wonder about all this. The West Indies of the 70's happened upon half a dozen world class pace bowlers. And maintained that through the end of the 80's. Every one and their dog wanted to be a pace bowler, and every other country tried to copy them. When Shane Warne emerged, he came up against batsmen who'd barely played spin, let alone a leggy, and he made hay. As did Murali. I wonder if Warne would ever had got a run out as a pro with analytics telling you you could only take wickets bowling at 85 mph +. It is happening in baseball, where the hitter for average is disappearing. As is the variety in the game.
In the last five years, the number of data points available to football teams has gone from 4000 per game to four million. I wrote about the football data revolution, and how it could be a key factor in England v Germany, for @wireduk #ENGGER
I know sports data has always been used, but for some reason that level of analytics depresses me.
The amount of hard disk space taken up with utterly trivial data must be immense. Thousands of gig of data that will all be irrelevant in ten years time.
Not really. Storage is dirt cheap these days, especially with the cloud. The sort of level of data storage required for sports analytics is absolutely tiny compared to many other operations.
The upside is that even with 4 million pieces of data, predicting the result of matches is seemingly impossible. Or any other event in the game on which there is a betting market. If the analytics point is depressing, then the ability of England to score only half their expected goals is a relief.
Tony Bloom and Matthew Benham wave from their massive yachts. They have both made so much money out of being able to do exactly this, they now own premier league football clubs.
And all of their employees and clients are waving too, who have been invited along for a free cruise.
Tony Bloom genius move is that the employees become stakeholders in the "investment fund" (that isn't the same as just giving shares).
Brady is an interesting one. His success at quarterbacking NFL isn't I think because he's the most talented (His draft was famously terrible) but because he does precisely what's needed when it's needed. He's basically got the world's best quarterback analytics % brain built in. Teams don't find this sort of player that often nowadays because they rely on the stats team to direct around selecting for raw talent; but it still has a massive value - it won't show at a combine mind.
That might be because they are testing the wrong thing for a QB at the combine. So many of the combine tests are irreverent for that incredibly specialist position e.g. it doesn't matter one bit how much they can benchpress.
Its a bit like worrying a football club concerning themselves with how fast a goalie can sprint a 100m....
On your latter point, that's something Liverpool track when assessing a goalie, is something useful considering the high line Liverpool play with and the gorgeous bastard Alisson Becker playing as a sweeper at time.
100m? Really? Short sprints I can see, 100m? Why do you care basically what their long range top speed is? They are never going to get any opportunity to get near that.
Alisson Becker takes the free kick in injury time from the half way line and if it goes wrong/becomes a counter attack he needs to sprint around 50 metres to get back to goal.
Brady is an interesting one. His success at quarterbacking NFL isn't I think because he's the most talented (His draft was famously terrible) but because he does precisely what's needed when it's needed. He's basically got the world's best quarterback analytics % brain built in. Teams don't find this sort of player that often nowadays because they rely on the stats team to direct around selecting for raw talent; but it still has a massive value - it won't show at a combine mind.
That might be because they are testing the wrong thing for a QB at the combine. So many of the combine tests are irreverent for that incredibly specialist position e.g. it doesn't matter one bit how much they can benchpress.
Its a bit like worrying a football club concerning themselves with how fast a goalie can sprint a 100m....
Remember, that was the whole thing about "moneyball". It wasn't that baseball didn't do any analytics, it was they did the wrong analytics.
NFL is weird. They employ masses of big brain nerds to crunch data, and for instance they demonstrated to the coaches repeatedly that going for it on 4th down is overall +ve approach, and at the very least they should be doing it a lot more....the coaches for the most part have ignored this.
There is a college coach has even being the A/B tester for this, who goes for it loads and shown good success, even though he over does it and the opposition know he does.
I think teams go for it on fourth down a lot more these days. Perhaps not as often as they should, but they do. This was one was very ballsy:
That said, I think they pass on field goal chances a little too often. I suspect the stats people say it's all about seven points, but it isn't.
I believe it is still way way short of what is deemed "optimal", especially in particular "lower risk" scenarios. The coaches always have this fall back concern that they are possibly giving field position away, and think it is lower risk to just pin the opposition back on their own line.
Brady is an interesting one. His success at quarterbacking NFL isn't I think because he's the most talented (His draft was famously terrible) but because he does precisely what's needed when it's needed. He's basically got the world's best quarterback analytics % brain built in. Teams don't find this sort of player that often nowadays because they rely on the stats team to direct around selecting for raw talent; but it still has a massive value - it won't show at a combine mind.
I do wonder about all this. The West Indies of the 70's happened upon half a dozen world class pace bowlers. And maintained that through the end of the 80's. Every one and their dog wanted to be a pace bowler, and every other country tried to copy them. When Shane Warne emerged, he came up against batsmen who'd barely played spin, let alone a leggy, and he made hay. As did Murali. I wonder if Warne would ever had got a run out as a pro with analytics telling you you could only take wickets bowling at 85 mph +. It is happening in baseball, where the hitter for average is disappearing. As is the variety in the game.
Mike Trout waves......the highest paid player in baseball....
I don't know enough about baseball, but it sounds a bit like people bemoaning the loss of the brilliant mid range shooters in basketball (who weren't as good at 3 points). Its been shown it is a statistically inferior approach. Having somebody who can shot 35-40% of 3-points is worth just so much more over the course of a season.
Brady is an interesting one. His success at quarterbacking NFL isn't I think because he's the most talented (His draft was famously terrible) but because he does precisely what's needed when it's needed. He's basically got the world's best quarterback analytics % brain built in. Teams don't find this sort of player that often nowadays because they rely on the stats team to direct around selecting for raw talent; but it still has a massive value - it won't show at a combine mind.
I do wonder about all this. The West Indies of the 70's happened upon half a dozen world class pace bowlers. And maintained that through the end of the 80's. Every one and their dog wanted to be a pace bowler, and every other country tried to copy them. When Shane Warne emerged, he came up against batsmen who'd barely played spin, let alone a leggy, and he made hay. As did Murali. I wonder if Warne would ever had got a run out as a pro with analytics telling you you could only take wickets bowling at 85 mph +. It is happening in baseball, where the hitter for average is disappearing. As is the variety in the game.
I've got a feeling Warne started more as a batsman who could bowl a bit (perhaps the opposite of Steve Smith and Kevin Pietersen).
On the anti-Whitty protestors, the thing that most concerns me is that the charge of treason is now being thrown around at every turn.
This is another Brexit benefit, of course, encouraged by the two post-referendum governments, to brand any criticism of the implementation of Brexit as treason. This poison, now unleashed, spreads further through our political discourse.
Thanks for that.
I don't think that's true. It's more an American habit, derived from the wildly overheated political debates they have, and it's been imported like so many inappropriate customs, from people celebrating Thanksgiving to Black Lives Matter. It's deeply ironic, of course, given that the US was founded on treason. When exactly did they discover it was wrong?
And the first time I saw it widely used here was actually before Brexit - it was Scots insulting each other over the 2014 referendum.
In the last five years, the number of data points available to football teams has gone from 4000 per game to four million. I wrote about the football data revolution, and how it could be a key factor in England v Germany, for @wireduk #ENGGER
I know sports data has always been used, but for some reason that level of analytics depresses me.
The amount of hard disk space taken up with utterly trivial data must be immense. Thousands of gig of data that will all be irrelevant in ten years time.
If there's one thing the world doesn't struggle with its finding gigabytes to store data.
In ten years time machines will be capable of handling petabytes of data.
Indeed already today the data in the cloud has exceeded an Exabyte.
On the subject of data, I heard from an old dear who has been double jabbed and is highly dismissive of those who think the vaccines are worse than Covid. She made the following joke.
"I don't know what is in the vaccines, but what I do know is that whenever I go into Morrisons' now I set the alarms off.
I don't know why Bill Gates' bothered. If he wants to know where I am, all he has to do is ring and I'd gladly tell him I was just in Morrisons."
Those idiots who harassed Chris Whitty weren't protestors or verbally abusive. They're probably not anti-vaccination. They probably don't give much of a sh*t about politics or public policy. They were just rowdy yobboes who didn't care (or who even mildly enjoyed) how they were unsettling a man they knew from the telly by putting their arms around him as if he were their best mate and demanding that he let them take a photo. The harshest thing that should happen is that they should get a stiff talking to by the police and perhaps a small fine and an order to deter them from acting like this again.
They are not in the same category as protestors who call him a "traitor". Their kind of action has absolutely eff-all to do with political violence.
As far as can be seen from the video, they were not "thugs".
Contrary to what half the cabinet are saying, the incident was not akin to the bombing of Pearl Harbour.
You are on a very slippery slope when you start imagining that all antisocial elements are saboteurs, spreaders of wrong ideas hell-bent on undermining the state. Some people are simply rowdy idiots who've had a few pints down their necks in the park and who weren't brought up properly to respect other people. Some are even petty criminals, or yobs. A yob is not necessarily a thug. Maybe someone should help by compiling a glossary.
The way this is being responded to may help Boris Johnson win back some of the support he has lost among "ABC1s" though. Sadly I expect more of the same. Perhaps there will be a "Chris's law" soon?
On the anti-Whitty protestors, the thing that most concerns me is that the charge of treason is now being thrown around at every turn.
This is another Brexit benefit, of course, encouraged by the two post-referendum governments, to brand any criticism of the implementation of Brexit as treason. This poison, now unleashed, spreads further through our political discourse.
Thanks for that.
I don't think that's true. It's more an American habit, derived from the wildly overheated political debates they have, and it's been imported like so many inappropriate customs, from people celebrating Thanksgiving to Black Lives Matter.
And the first time I saw it widely used here was actually before Brexit - it was Scots insulting each other over the 2014 referendum.
It is partly a product of a 2 sided debate.
The US for example is one of the few developed and democratic nations which only has 2 parties represented in its legislature and which are serious contenders for the US presidency and referendums by definition lead to a 2 sided debate, there is no nuance or broader alternative, you are either with one party or its opponent on the opposite team or one side of the argument or the other.
That's a 5 point swing to Labour within a week. So in 4 weeks that should be a 20 point swing, shouldn't it? Well, I hope that's how it works........
In terms of long term average polling numbers, that is basically still were it has been for 3-4 months now. Tories perhaps down 1%. As always, it is the Labour number that swings all over the place from 30% to 36%.
I just can't work out if Freedom day happening will be popular or not / good news for the government. I thought delaying it would be unpopular, but doesn't seem to be the case. Because one thing we have to offset against Freedom Day is furlough is winding down to all of a sudden people are going to be either back to work or finally losing their jobs (as employers are asked to contribute more and more of their wages again).
That's a 5 point swing to Labour within a week. So in 4 weeks that should be a 20 point swing, shouldn't it? Well, I hope that's how it works........
In terms of long term average polling numbers, that is basically still were it has been for 3-4 months now. Tories perhaps down 1%. As always, it is the Labour number that swings all over the place from 30% to 36%.
The take at the New Statesman is that labour are 'taking their muslim voters for granted'
On the anti-Whitty protestors, the thing that most concerns me is that the charge of treason is now being thrown around at every turn.
This is another Brexit benefit, of course, encouraged by the two post-referendum governments, to brand any criticism of the implementation of Brexit as treason. This poison, now unleashed, spreads further through our political discourse.
Thanks for that.
I don't think that's true. It's more an American habit, derived from the wildly overheated political debates they have, and it's been imported like so many inappropriate customs, from people celebrating Thanksgiving to Black Lives Matter.
And the first time I saw it widely used here was actually before Brexit - it was Scots insulting each other over the 2014 referendum.
It is partly a product of a 2 sided debate.
The US for example is one of the few developed and democratic nations which only has 2 parties represented in its legislature and which are serious contenders for the US presidency and referendums by definition lead to a 2 sided debate, there is no nuance or broader alternative, you are either with one party or its opponent on the opposite team or one side of the argument or the other.
So it becomes like a football or rugby match
You can have a two-sided debate with a recognition that both sides have things in common, so it doesn't involve accusing each other of treason.
It's a dangerous path we're on, but it's not inevitable.
I think the Torie would take that. Still 42% despite all the terrible headlines and delay of Freedom day / rising cases / etc.
I genuinely thought they would have seen serious drop over the past few weeks.
It would be a 1.25% swing from Tory to Labour since 2019 though which on UNS would therefore see Labour retain Batley and Spen on Thursday.
However how many votes Galloway and the far right get will also be pivotal there
Again I think given how poorly at times the government have handled COVID, Boris exposed as not even a poundshop Churchill, two big scandals over breaking the rules, the underlying consistent stories of some dodgy dealings, Gavin Williamson being Gavin Williamson, a 1.25% swing at this stage in the parliament is a miracle for the Tories.
On the anti-Whitty protestors, the thing that most concerns me is that the charge of treason is now being thrown around at every turn.
This is another Brexit benefit, of course, encouraged by the two post-referendum governments, to brand any criticism of the implementation of Brexit as treason. This poison, now unleashed, spreads further through our political discourse.
Thanks for that.
I don't think that's true. It's more an American habit, derived from the wildly overheated political debates they have, and it's been imported like so many inappropriate customs, from people celebrating Thanksgiving to Black Lives Matter.
And the first time I saw it widely used here was actually before Brexit - it was Scots insulting each other over the 2014 referendum.
It is partly a product of a 2 sided debate.
The US for example is one of the few developed and democratic nations which only has 2 parties represented in its legislature and which are serious contenders for the US presidency and referendums by definition lead to a 2 sided debate, there is no nuance or broader alternative, you are either with one party or its opponent on the opposite team or one side of the argument or the other.
So it becomes like a football or rugby match
To some extent probably, but don't forget American political parties are very different from those in Europe, having no agreed programmes at the party level, having much looser party discipline than here and being quasi-state nor private entities and being organised mostly at the state rather than the national level, so in fact Congress has 100 different political parties. So I'm always a little worried about comparing American party discipline and structure to our own.
People keep asking about the lack of government data being published on vaccinated v unvaccinated hospitalisations (although there has been some in PHE reports). Here's some French reporting on the impact of vaccinations there:
One key stat is that unvaccinated over 60s make up 3% of the population but 35% of hospitalisations (with much of the rest coming from unvaccinated younger groups).
The key to who wins could well be then whether For Britain, UKIP and the English Democrats take enough of the hard right 2019 Heavy Woollen Leaver vote that might otherwise have gone Tory to enable Labour to scrape home
FB are the most concerning of the three in this context, because they are so Islamophobic and because given the Tommy Robinson connection they have knowhow that they can call on when it comes to fomenting racial trouble. They could get on the scoreboard if there were an incident that helped them, so fingers crossed there won't be one and there are only one and a half days left so it's not looking like it.
I think the Torie would take that. Still 42% despite all the terrible headlines and delay of Freedom day / rising cases / etc.
I genuinely thought they would have seen serious drop over the past few weeks.
It would be a 1.25% swing from Tory to Labour since 2019 though which on UNS would therefore see Labour retain Batley and Spen on Thursday.
However how many votes Galloway and the far right get will also be pivotal there
Again I think given how poorly at times the government have handled COVID, Boris exposed as not even a poundshop Churchill, two big scandals over breaking the rules, the underlying consistent stories of some dodgy dealings, Gavin Williamson being Gavin Williamson, a 1.25% swing at this stage in the parliament is a miracle for the Tories.
Most government have been shedding votes by now.
I think the tories are shedding votes in the sense that some tory voters are simpy not turning out. Chesham and Amersham showed this, and I wonder if that's behind their drift in B&S too. Tory no-show.
We are far from 1997 territory yet, but the tories need to find out why and quickly.
On the anti-Whitty protestors, the thing that most concerns me is that the charge of treason is now being thrown around at every turn.
This is another Brexit benefit, of course, encouraged by the two post-referendum governments, to brand any criticism of the implementation of Brexit as treason. This poison, now unleashed, spreads further through our political discourse.
Thanks for that.
I don't think that's true. It's more an American habit, derived from the wildly overheated political debates they have, and it's been imported like so many inappropriate customs, from people celebrating Thanksgiving to Black Lives Matter.
And the first time I saw it widely used here was actually before Brexit - it was Scots insulting each other over the 2014 referendum.
It is partly a product of a 2 sided debate.
The US for example is one of the few developed and democratic nations which only has 2 parties represented in its legislature and which are serious contenders for the US presidency and referendums by definition lead to a 2 sided debate, there is no nuance or broader alternative, you are either with one party or its opponent on the opposite team or one side of the argument or the other.
So it becomes like a football or rugby match
To some extent probably, but don't forget American political parties are very different from those in Europe, having no agreed programmes at the party level, having much looser party discipline than here and being quasi-state nor private entities and being organised mostly at the state rather than the national level, so in fact Congress has 100 different political parties. So I'm always a little worried about comparing American party discipline and structure to our own.
First past the post has a tendency to result in 2 party politics because it usually boils down to a binary, the incumbent or (an)other lot choice.
I think the Torie would take that. Still 42% despite all the terrible headlines and delay of Freedom day / rising cases / etc.
I genuinely thought they would have seen serious drop over the past few weeks.
It would be a 1.25% swing from Tory to Labour since 2019 though which on UNS would therefore see Labour retain Batley and Spen on Thursday.
However how many votes Galloway and the far right get will also be pivotal there
Again I think given how poorly at times the government have handled COVID, Boris exposed as not even a poundshop Churchill, two big scandals over breaking the rules, the underlying consistent stories of some dodgy dealings, Gavin Williamson being Gavin Williamson, a 1.25% swing at this stage in the parliament is a miracle for the Tories.
Most government have been shedding votes by now.
I think the tories are shedding votes in the sense that some tory voters are simpy not turning out. Chesham and Amersham showed this, and I wonder if that's behind their drift in B&S too. Tory no-show.
We are far from 1997 territory yet, but the tories need to find out why and quickly.
I think there is no urgency and / or a sense of not letting them get complacent amongst some of their voters. Let’s be honest though, who sees SKS as credible?
Brady is an interesting one. His success at quarterbacking NFL isn't I think because he's the most talented (His draft was famously terrible) but because he does precisely what's needed when it's needed. He's basically got the world's best quarterback analytics % brain built in. Teams don't find this sort of player that often nowadays because they rely on the stats team to direct around selecting for raw talent; but it still has a massive value - it won't show at a combine mind.
I do wonder about all this. The West Indies of the 70's happened upon half a dozen world class pace bowlers. And maintained that through the end of the 80's. Every one and their dog wanted to be a pace bowler, and every other country tried to copy them. When Shane Warne emerged, he came up against batsmen who'd barely played spin, let alone a leggy, and he made hay. As did Murali. I wonder if Warne would ever had got a run out as a pro with analytics telling you you could only take wickets bowling at 85 mph +. It is happening in baseball, where the hitter for average is disappearing. As is the variety in the game.
Mike Trout waves......the highest paid player in baseball....
I don't know enough about baseball, but it sounds a bit like people bemoaning the loss of the brilliant mid range shooters in basketball (who weren't as good at 3 points). Its been shown it is a statistically inferior approach. Having somebody who can shot 35-40% of 3-points is worth just so much more over the course of a season.
Trout is a bit of an exception though. He has 4 of the 5 assets. His only drawback being an ordinary, though not sub par, fielder. My worry is at a younger age. If everyone is looking for the same kind of player, only that kind of player will be produced. Making the sport very samey. Until the fashion and the numbers change. I'm a great fan of analytics, tbh. But I'd like to keep mavericks in sport if possible.
On the anti-Whitty protestors, the thing that most concerns me is that the charge of treason is now being thrown around at every turn.
This is another Brexit benefit, of course, encouraged by the two post-referendum governments, to brand any criticism of the implementation of Brexit as treason. This poison, now unleashed, spreads further through our political discourse.
Thanks for that.
I don't think that's true. It's more an American habit, derived from the wildly overheated political debates they have, and it's been imported like so many inappropriate customs, from people celebrating Thanksgiving to Black Lives Matter.
And the first time I saw it widely used here was actually before Brexit - it was Scots insulting each other over the 2014 referendum.
It is partly a product of a 2 sided debate.
The US for example is one of the few developed and democratic nations which only has 2 parties represented in its legislature and which are serious contenders for the US presidency and referendums by definition lead to a 2 sided debate, there is no nuance or broader alternative, you are either with one party or its opponent on the opposite team or one side of the argument or the other.
So it becomes like a football or rugby match
To some extent probably, but don't forget American political parties are very different from those in Europe, having no agreed programmes at the party level, having much looser party discipline than here and being quasi-state nor private entities and being organised mostly at the state rather than the national level, so in fact Congress has 100 different political parties. So I'm always a little worried about comparing American party discipline and structure to our own.
To an extent, in the sense there is a big difference in the ideology of say Joe Manchin and AOC who are both Democrats in Congress and Romney and Josh Hawley who are both Republicans in Congress.
However 60 years ago there were also far more moderate Republicans from New England than there are now and far more conservative Democrats from the South than there are now.
The Republican Party now is dominated by conservative southerners and those from rural areas and the Democratic party is dominated by liberals from the big cities and coasts meaning both parties are much more ideological than they were, exacerbating the partisan divide.
Biden was able to win in 2020 partly by crossing this divide and presenting himself as a rare moderate
When the LD's won C+A one of the first comments I saw was "The people of C+A are traitors!" I didn't know whether this was serious or ironic. On further reflection, I didn't know which of the options was more depressing.
When the LD's won C+A one of the first comments I saw was "The people of C+A are traitors!" I didn't know whether this was serious or ironic. On further reflection, I didn't know which of the options was more depressing.
Brady is an interesting one. His success at quarterbacking NFL isn't I think because he's the most talented (His draft was famously terrible) but because he does precisely what's needed when it's needed. He's basically got the world's best quarterback analytics % brain built in. Teams don't find this sort of player that often nowadays because they rely on the stats team to direct around selecting for raw talent; but it still has a massive value - it won't show at a combine mind.
I do wonder about all this. The West Indies of the 70's happened upon half a dozen world class pace bowlers. And maintained that through the end of the 80's. Every one and their dog wanted to be a pace bowler, and every other country tried to copy them. When Shane Warne emerged, he came up against batsmen who'd barely played spin, let alone a leggy, and he made hay. As did Murali. I wonder if Warne would ever had got a run out as a pro with analytics telling you you could only take wickets bowling at 85 mph +. It is happening in baseball, where the hitter for average is disappearing. As is the variety in the game.
Another shocking batting performance from the Sri Lankans. I am really not sure what England are learning from this (other than running 2 batsmen to the same end is probably not optimal, this is a freebie to those obsessed with analytics).
Comments
- Cases are on the same scale left and right
- Hospitalisations are on the same scale left and right (and scaled such that the 7-day average of hospitalisations on the current wave start at the same height as the 7-day average of cases)
- Hospital occupancy is on the same scale left and right
A Tory voter: “Labour to me are spend, spend, spend and don’t care about what’s happening in future, they just want to spend money. "
Bloody hilarious. Have they seen our borrowing figures under Johnson? Or noticed that the Bank of England buys all the government debt?
But the computer models increasingly don't even need a human to write that down, it can be inferred from the data.
The difference is that the Tories are alert to the borrowing figures and Sunak has already addressed Parliament on how he intends to get them back down again.
It has been demonstrated from millions of matches that a more consistently dangerous approach is to be working the ball in from the flanks into the central areas in and around the box, looking to then slip runners in. You are giving yourself more opportunities for more shots from areas with a higher expected return.
That isn't to say you never go wide, but it is an inferior option overall.
Its the same with the long range shot, it has been shown the probability of scoring is far too low compared to the other options. Now if the defence always just backs right off and gives you an age to shoot, then yes you do try some attempts, but the primary approach should always be to advance the ball closer and more central to the goal.
Basketball had the same revolution about 5 years ago. Now the general tactics is either shot from very close to the net for 2, or kick it out for 3. You rarely go for the mid-ranged 2 point shot, you are losing expected value by doing so on average.
Thousands of gig of data that will all be irrelevant in ten years time.
They estimate the overall infection fatality rate (IFR) of coronavirus has been driven down to 0.085 per cent. In the most vulnerable over-75s group, the IFR is now thought to be under 2 per cent after plummeting from 17 per cent during the winter peak in January.
This doesn't take any account for vaccine status of those dying or any other conditions.
It would be interesting to know if you stripped out unvaccinated what it would be? Then stripped out people who are 95 year olds with 27 other terrible underlying conditions meaning that they are incredibly vulnerable to dying from basically anything.
In ten years time machines will be capable of handling petabytes of data.
Indeed already today the data in the cloud has exceeded an Exabyte.
Teams don't find this sort of player that often nowadays because they rely on the stats team to direct around selecting for raw talent; but it still has a massive value - it won't show at a combine mind.
The 16-team tournament will still take place from 17 October to 14 November.
The International Cricket Council (ICC) gave India a deadline of Monday to say whether it could still host the tournament amid a rise in Covid cases.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/57651024
The reason it's quite a good tactic is that it creates gaps between the defenders. If the delivery is right it's almost impossible to do anything about it. There was a Man Utd game under Moyes when they just lumped balls into the box and he got a lot of stick for it, but it is still an important part of attacking in my opinion.
Its a bit like worrying a football club concerning themselves with how fast a goalie can sprint a 100m....
Remember, that was the whole thing about "moneyball". It wasn't that baseball didn't do any analytics, it was they did the wrong analytics.
NFL is weird. They employ masses of big brain nerds to crunch data, and for instance they demonstrated to the coaches repeatedly that going for it on 4th down is overall +ve approach, and at the very least they should be doing it a lot more....the coaches for the most part have ignored this advice for years now.
There is a college coach has even being the A/B tester for this, who goes for it loads and shown good success, even though he over does it and the opposition know he does.
Would be interesting to see the numbers for the vaccinated alone (but you'd probably need to adjust for different vaccination tastes in different age groups), but I don't think it makes sense to strip out the very old and infirm. They're a valid part of a population average.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLQ5tqIf1TE
That said, I think they pass on field goal chances a little too often. I suspect the stats people say it's all about seven points, but it isn't.
When Shane Warne emerged, he came up against batsmen who'd barely played spin, let alone a leggy, and he made hay. As did Murali.
I wonder if Warne would ever had got a run out as a pro with analytics telling you you could only take wickets bowling at 85 mph +.
It is happening in baseball, where the hitter for average is disappearing. As is the variety in the game.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnmRE0-M270
Tories 42%
Labour 33%
LDs 9%
Greens 5%
SNP 4%
https://twitter.com/SavantaComRes/status/1409837750350663681?s=20
I don't know enough about baseball, but it sounds a bit like people bemoaning the loss of the brilliant mid range shooters in basketball (who weren't as good at 3 points). Its been shown it is a statistically inferior approach. Having somebody who can shot 35-40% of 3-points is worth just so much more over the course of a season.
CON: 42% (-2)
LAB: 33% (+3)
LDM: 9% (-1)
GRN: 5% (=)
SNP: 4% (=)
Via @SavantaComRes, 25-27 Jun. Changes w/ 18-20 Jun.
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1409838493292011521?s=20
God, he was an awesome player.
https://theathletic.co.uk/2679657/2021/06/29/crystal-palace-set-to-appoint-patrick-vieira-as-their-new-manager/
I genuinely thought they would have seen serious drop over the past few weeks.
And the first time I saw it widely used here was actually before Brexit - it was Scots insulting each other over the 2014 referendum.
"I don't know what is in the vaccines, but what I do know is that whenever I go into Morrisons' now I set the alarms off.
I don't know why Bill Gates' bothered. If he wants to know where I am, all he has to do is ring and I'd gladly tell him I was just in Morrisons."
They are not in the same category as protestors who call him a "traitor". Their kind of action has absolutely eff-all to do with political violence.
As far as can be seen from the video, they were not "thugs".
Contrary to what half the cabinet are saying, the incident was not akin to the bombing of Pearl Harbour.
You are on a very slippery slope when you start imagining that all antisocial elements are saboteurs, spreaders of wrong ideas hell-bent on undermining the state. Some people are simply rowdy idiots who've had a few pints down their necks in the park and who weren't brought up properly to respect other people. Some are even petty criminals, or yobs. A yob is not necessarily a thug. Maybe someone should help by compiling a glossary.
The way this is being responded to may help Boris Johnson win back some of the support he has lost among "ABC1s" though. Sadly I expect more of the same. Perhaps there will be a "Chris's law" soon?
The US for example is one of the few developed and democratic nations which only has 2 parties represented in its legislature and which are serious contenders for the US presidency and referendums by definition lead to a 2 sided debate, there is no nuance or broader alternative, you are either with one party or its opponent on the opposite team or one side of the argument or the other.
So it becomes like a football or rugby match
I just can't work out if Freedom day happening will be popular or not / good news for the government. I thought delaying it would be unpopular, but doesn't seem to be the case. Because one thing we have to offset against Freedom Day is furlough is winding down to all of a sudden people are going to be either back to work or finally losing their jobs (as employers are asked to contribute more and more of their wages again).
Hard not to smile really isn't it.....
However how many votes Galloway and the far right get will also be pivotal there
It's a dangerous path we're on, but it's not inevitable.
Most government have been shedding votes by now.
https://twitter.com/nicolasberrod/status/1409826925426663429
One key stat is that unvaccinated over 60s make up 3% of the population but 35% of hospitalisations (with much of the rest coming from unvaccinated younger groups).
We are far from 1997 territory yet, but the tories need to find out why and quickly.
My worry is at a younger age. If everyone is looking for the same kind of player, only that kind of player will be produced. Making the sport very samey. Until the fashion and the numbers change.
I'm a great fan of analytics, tbh.
But I'd like to keep mavericks in sport if possible.
However 60 years ago there were also far more moderate Republicans from New England than there are now and far more conservative Democrats from the South than there are now.
The Republican Party now is dominated by conservative southerners and those from rural areas and the Democratic party is dominated by liberals from the big cities and coasts meaning both parties are much more ideological than they were, exacerbating the partisan divide.
Biden was able to win in 2020 partly by crossing this divide and presenting himself as a rare moderate
I didn't know whether this was serious or ironic.
On further reflection, I didn't know which of the options was more depressing.
NEW THREAD
https://youtu.be/PZTo9dlmju8
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=42&LAB=33&LIB=9&Reform=2&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base
Germany, at ~7/1, are the value bet.
I can’t quite bring myself to back them, though!