World Cup Draw Thread *spoilers*

[Tummy]

I'd take any chance of knocking Germany out the bloody world cup. Especially a historically weaker team.

Who's a historically weaker team?

You could give 10-1 odds that the US will beat Spain in a rematch and I wouldn't take it.

Erm... alright ?

The USA have beaten Spain recently ? have they not?

No one is underestimating anyone. Similarly, no one (apart from you) is overestimating anyone either.

You asked why people are confident of beating USA. I'm pretty damn confident.

I'm not overestimating anyone? I don't expect the USA game to be easy, nor do I expect the two other teams to roll over? All the teams that have got to the World Cup are good, some better then others but none the less.

And I'm pleased your confident.

Ask Americans if they're confident of even getting a draw out of that game. If they don't expect a draw, we should expect a draw. Simple.

What?

If they don't expect a draw are they expecting a win? or to lose? Both sides should be going in to the opening game thinking "we can win here".

 

[muon]

Who's a historically weaker team?

The German team. If we're to ever knock them out the world cup or face a german team, its now.

Erm... alright ?

The USA have beaten Spain recently ? have they not?

Doesn't make them a strong side.

I'm not overestimating anyone? I don't expect the USA game to be easy, nor do I expect the two other teams to roll over? All the teams that have got to the World Cup are good, some better then others but none the less.

And I'm pleased your confident.

I'm confident, because its rational to be confident. Who said anything about teams rolling over. Do you think Wigan were just rolling over when they lost 9-1?

England are 4/7 on to win the game against USA.

England should beat the USA. No amount of excuses about how they beat Spain or are a "decent" side is acceptable.

What?

If they don't expect a draw are they expecting a win? or to lose? Both sides should be going in to the opening game thinking "we can win here".

Fans go into the match, hoping to win. Expecting to win is a different matter.

If both sides expecting to win, then one or both sides are deluding themselves. If one expects to lose and yet the other doesn't expect to win, then again something is going wrong.

Lets go back to your original comment.

I don't know why England are so confident about beating the USA, they're a good side. They won something quite recently didn't they?

What should I be expecting? A draw? Because the odds for a draw are pretty good if that's the most likely outcome.

 

[Tummy]

The German team. If we're to ever knock them out the world cup, its now.

I think the German team are a good side, They have a habbit of playing very well in big games. They're historically a good World Cup team, they've done better in World Cups then England have for example.

Doesn't make them a strong side.

We were destroyed by Spain and were a strong side?

I think you're looking for an arguement that isn't really there.

I don't expect any easy games at the World Cup, I think the USA will be a tough opening game (I'd much rather play them second or third).

So what if Wigan were destroyed by Spurs?

 

[Tummy]

England are 4/7 on to win the game against USA.

England should beat the USA. No amount of excuses about how they beat Spain or are a "decent" side is acceptable.

England "should" of qualified for the Euro's? We were playing a "decent" side then?

Fans go into the match, hoping to win. Expecting to win is a different matter.

If both sides expecting to win, then one or both sides are deluding themselves. If one expects to lose and yet the other doesn't expect to win, then again something is going wrong.

What? There is nothing wrong with two sides going in to a game expecting to win.

Lets go back to your original comment.

What should I be expecting? A draw? Because the odds for a draw are pretty good if that's the most likely outcome.

You've said you're expecting England to beat the USA? ...

I've said I'm not as confident, I don't expect England to beat the USA, nor do I expect them to lose, nor do I expect them to draw. I don't know what will happen, I'm not as confident as other England fans.

 

[muon]

England "should" of qualified for the Euro's? We were playing a "decent" side then?

Again. I'm not saying the USA can't win. I'm not saying for example that its impossible for Tottenham to win the Premiership.

What? There is nothing wrong with two sides going in to a game expecting to win.

Two teams rationally expecting to win the same game, is incorrect. In betting you'd make arbitrage profits from both sets of fans.

You've said you're expecting England to beat the USA? ...

I've said I'm not as confident, I don't expect England to beat the USA, nor do I expect them to lose, nor do I expect them to draw. I don't know what will happen, I'm not as confident as other England fans.

Impossible. You MUST have an expectation. Unless you expect the match to never be played or completed, one of those must happen. Therefore, you must have an expectation of one of them happening.

Only time you wouldn't know which will happen is when they are all as likely as each other. But then, state that.

edit:

To clarify on my last sentence. The only time this would be sensible, is if you believe England = USA and that for some reason a win for either side is as likely as a draw. Or if you have no idea how good they are (e.g. me asking you, would I or my neighbour win in an arm wrestle).

 

[Tummy]

Again. I'm not saying the USA can't win. I'm not saying for example that its impossible for Tottenham to win the Premiership.

You just said that England "should" win, and that because the USA are "decent" doesn't count for anything. England lost a game to a decent side that they "should" of won.

I don't get what you're getting at.

Two teams rationally expecting to win the same game, is incorrect. In betting you'd make arbitrage profits from both sets of fans.

Football isn't all about betting

Two teams can expect to win the same game, two teams can't win the same game.

Impossible. You MUST have an expectation. Unless you expect the match to never be played, one of those must happen. Therefore, you must have an expectation of one of them happening.

Only time you wouldn't know which will happen is when they are all as likely as each other. But then, state that.

No. I don't have an expectation, I know full well that the game will be played.

I have no expectation of one of anything happening. I know the game can end one of three ways for England.

I'm not as confident as other people on this thread about England beating the USA. I don't expect England to win / lose or draw. I have no idea what will happen in that game.

I actually have no idea what point you're trying to make so I'm going to bed. You just seem to want to argue.

 

[muon]

If you have no firm expectation of what will happen. Then you have a random expectation.

1. Therefore, you believe that a win for England, a win for USA and a draw is as likely as each other.

2. Or you genuinely don't have an expectation because you have no information about either team. So you don't know about world rankings, the quality of the players in the team, the past results of the team etc.

Since I know, you haven't been living in a bubble, the second possibility isn't true. So you must believe the first.

If you believe the first, no one else will agree with you on it.

Simple.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why did I look at betting? Because it monetizes people's aggregate expectations.

Also it solves the problem of where 2 people can expect both sides to win at the same time. This is irrational. 2 rational agents should come to the same conclusions given the same information (but it happens because we aren't robots). By using money, we can aggregate the strengths of these expectations to come up with an aggregate level.

England are 4/7(1.58) odds on to win on betfair, that is a ~63.3% belief that England will win.

For completeness, ~28.6% a draw and ~19.6% of a USA win.

Note that the odds add up to over 100% (I could if I wanted, bet on all 3 outcomes and be guaranteed money, given that someone is willing to match however much I wanted to bet, but my money would be tied up for 6 months for a small payoff). This is because the odds on betfair aren't very efficient at the moment because only £9 has actually been matched. Also, because with a bet now, you lose over 6 months interest, it has to compensate for that.

Compare that to the Man Utd vs West Ham game today. The implied chances add up to 100.9%. This market is very fluid with £280,000+ matched so far.

Again for completeness, Man Utd to win (~67.6%), Draw (~21.7%), West Ham to win (~11.6%).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

So what do my ramblings mean? When you say you don't understand how people could come to the conclusion that England should win, you just aren't thinking properly.

 

[muon]

You just said that England "should" win, and that because the USA are "decent" doesn't count for anything. England lost a game to a decent side that they "should" of won.

I don't get what you're getting at.

The US are capable of winning or getting a draw. But that doesn't mean it is likely to happen. This possibility doesn't stop me from being confident of England beating the USA.

Football isn't all about betting

Ah, but its a much better way to analyse what people think is most likely to happen.

Two teams can expect to win the same game, two teams can't win the same game.

2 teams, rationally cannot expect to win the same game because they can't win the same game. They can only both hope that random variance allows them to win the game. Or they could just not think about it properly due to limited information or computability.

No. I don't have an expectation, I know full well that the game will be played.

I have no expectation of one of anything happening. I know the game can end one of three ways for England.

I'm not as confident as other people on this thread about England beating the USA. I don't expect England to win / lose or draw. I have no idea what will happen in that game.

I actually have no idea what point you're trying to make so I'm going to bed. You just seem to want to argue.

See above.

I'm not trying to argue. I find irrational expectations very interesting. Its very common in many areas of life and as an economics student it is something I study.

It is one of the main criticisms of economics. We assume that people are able to correctly analyse all probabilities on a micro level, when in reality we are all subject to cognitive limitations and subjectivities. On an "aggregate" level (see above post) it is usually true that we converge on the true probabilities.

 

[rossw]

USA beat Spain 2-0 in the Confed cup

 

[sanaxe1]

USA beat Spain 2-0 in the Confed cup

it is classed as a upset though , it doesnt prove there a good team. I picked this from the same list of upsets.

2001 - In the Copa America 2001, the last minute replacement team, Honduras, defeated Brazil 2–0, in the quarter-finals

 

[Tummy]

it is classed as a upset though , it doesnt prove there a good team. I picked this from the same list of upsets.

2001 - In the Copa America 2001, the last minute replacement team, Honduras, defeated Brazil 2–0, in the quarter-finals

USA beat Spain and aren't a good side?
England lose to Spain and are a good side?

 

[shipinabottle]

Personal thoughts on our group is we'll destroy it. or atleast we should.

im a firm believer in frame of mind and i believe its where england goes horribly wrong, i think they have too much respect for thier opposition at times.

in public you can give all the respect you want but outside of public i firmly believe england should be thinking we can obliterate these guys, confidence in knowing you play for a massive teams and have massive performances that these guys could dream of every week.

i highly doubt brazil sit in a dressing room thinking these guys are good, we have to be careful. i generally dont believe they do that, i think they say we are great, we play fantastic football, lets go play it and really dont give a thought to how good the opposition is. this is how they can go out an destroy teams by a good goal deficite each game.

just a personal belief on why i think england have troubles, we have the team, its the only thing i can think of. i think joe coles (he's a spark, along the lines of rooney) return is about perfect timing, and hopefully hargreaves can get in on the action by WC time as id fully want him in therer than barry.

 

[muon]

USA beat Spain and aren't a good side?
England lose to Spain and are a good side?

Well done then. USA > England.

But what about the last England vs USA game?

 

[Pigeon_Killer]

If the World Cup was a WAG competition we'd come last every single time. Looking through the girls on MSN most of ours (Cheryl being the exception) are complete munters compared to the rest

 

[duc999]

Our WC WAGS would beat them in a fight though , especially with 'Slugger' Cole leading them

 

[Mr_White]

Well done then. USA > England.

But what about the last England vs USA game?

USA beat Spain, USA will win World Cup, praise prophet Tummy.

 

[Tombstone]

Our WC WAGS would beat them in a fight though , especially with 'Slugger' Cole leading them

Dont know...have you seen how big Coles nose is? Thats a nose which would make a right mess if it was broken. Probably faint from blood loss from that big a nose.

 

[Tummy]

USA beat Spain, USA will win World Cup, praise prophet Tummy.

tool

@ ghosty, I still don't know who will win, England should be looking for a minium of 6 points from that group, same goes for the USA. I'm not as confident about beating the USA as everyone else.

I'm not dissmissing the USA as been a walk over, like many are, and have pointed out that they beat a very good Spain team infact the same Spain that thumped England.

 

[Mr_White]

tool

Very droll, well done.

Reciting the fact that the USA beat Spain is pointless, unless you're going to try and conclude that it's a true indication of their skill level, rather than one of football's anomalies, but obviously you seem to think it's an indication of their true skill, otherwise you wouldn't place such weight on it and try and argue it so vehemently, so I assume you expect them to win the world cup as well? if they're good enough to beat Spain, they should win easily.

Oh, I forgot, you don't expect any result from any match.

 

[muon]

http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1258070

This is one of the largest football forums on the internet. I have linked to a thread within the US subforum.

An application of backward looking expectations in order to calculate most likely group outcomes. This uses the Elo rating system (click to get exact mathematical formulae).

In case people don't know

The Elo rating system is a method for calculating the relative skill levels of players in two-player games such as chess and Go. It is named after its creator Arpad Elo, a Hungarian-born American physics professor.
The Elo system was invented as an improved chess rating system, but today it is also used in many other games. It is also used as a rating system for multiplayer competition in a number of computer games[1], and has been adapted to team sports including association football, American college football and basketball, and Major League Baseball.

And in general the Elo Ratings system when used to create rankings gives a more realistic ranking than fifa rankings. Of course this isn't perfect, since this is still a backward looking system (i.e. looks at past results) but it is entirely objective. Also since Tummy is looking only at past results to make some naive conclusions, he can't use this criticism as a retort.

The Elo rankings as of Nov 22nd are here http://www.eloratings.net/world.html , you have to scroll down a bit.