• limpid

      Just visiting?   27/12/16

      Please click "Sign Up" and login to use the full functionality of the site.
  • entries
    44
  • comments
    45
  • views
    13,835

About this blog

Football picks

Entries in this blog

leviramsey

A 2-0 loss at home and a pair of clubs near us in the table beating clubs at the other end of the table. Disaster?

Our chances of staying up actually slightly improved.

16th 0.1% unchanged
17th 0.6% +0.1%
18th 2.4% +0.9%
19th 12.3% +4.1%
20th 84.6% -5.1%
  1. Villa: 99.3% (-0.1%)
  2. Sunderland: 86.9% (+8.0%)
  3. Swansea: 43.4% (+7.4%)
  4. Bournemouth: 28.8% (-12.6%)
  5. Newcastle: 24.1% (+1.2%)
  6. Norwich: 15.2% (-3.2%)
  7. West Brom: 1.2% (-0.3%)
  8. Chelsea: 1.1% (-0.4%)
leviramsey

Despite both Newcastle and Bournemouth notching wins, our chances of staying up managed to slightly improve.

16th 0.1% unchanged
17th 0.5% +0.1%
18th 1.5% +0.2%
19th 8.2% +2.1%
20th 89.7% -2.4%
  1. Villa: 99.4% (-0.1%)
  2. Sunderland: 78.9% (+10.5%)
  3. Bournemouth: 41.4% (-24.7%)
  4. Swansea: 36.0% (+22.3%)
  5. Newcastle: 22.9% (-25.7%)
  6. Norwich: 18.4% (+15.1%)
  7. Chelsea: 1.5% (+0.5%), West Brom: 1.5% (+1.4%)
leviramsey

Dead cats apparently have a reputation for bouncing.

The relevance to Villa after a home loss to Watford may not be clear, but it is perhaps in that light that one should consider this fact:

Villa's chances of staying up improved despite a home loss to Watford. Whether the change was major (it more than doubled!) or minor (the difference was 0.3%) is a question of the observer's perspective, but the fact remains: the club are in a slightly better place today than last week.

Crazy, huh? Of course, our chances of finishing rock bottom increased as well:

16th 0.1% +0.1%
17th 0.4% +0.2%
18th 1.3% -0.8%
19th 6.1% -4.1%
20th 92.1% +4.6%

One [possible] reason for this phenomenon: the clubs immediately above us are close enough in goal difference that nearly any scenario where we finish level with them sees us with a better goal difference.

  1. Villa: 99.5% (-0.3%)
  2. Sunderland: 67.6% (-22.2%)
  3. Bournemouth: 66.1% (-13.5%)
  4. Newcastle: 48.6% (+30.6%)
  5. Swansea: 13.7% (+9.7%)
  6. Norwich: 3.3% (-5.2%)
  7. Chelsea: 1.0% (+0.7%)
  8. West Brom: 0.1% (unchanged), Stoke: 0.1% (+0.1%)
leviramsey
I want things to be stable, but not this kind of stable...

The good: Losing 4-0 to Everton didn't really hurt us.

The bad: It definitely didn't help us.

Our relgation chances stay the same, though the chances of finishing bottom increase somewhat.

17th 0.2% unchanged
18th 2.1% -1.4%
19th 10.2% -7.5%
20th 87.5% +8.9% Median, most likely
  1. Villa: 99.8% (unchanged)
  2. Sunderland: 89.8% (-6.2%)
  3. Bournemouth: 79.6% (-3.0%)
  4. Newcastle: 18.0% (+11.8%)
  5. Norwich: 8.5% (+3.2%)
  6. Swansea: 4.0% (+0.5%)
  7. Chelsea: 0.3% (-1.6%)
  8. West Brom: 0.1% (-3.8%)
leviramsey

Getting a draw against the league leaders was not enough to dramatically improve the Monte Carlo's estimations, but it didn't dramatically hurt things (not that things could have gotten much worse). This is not really a cause for pressing the panic button. The Monte Carlo's assessment is now just about solely based on the period when you could fairly say that other sides figured out Sherwood. Assuming that the level of performance Remi Garde brought out of the team is the new normal, as some of the worse performances under Sherwood "age out", the story of the next few rounds of Monte Carlos will be steady improvement.

There was still improvement, in some sense, in the Monte Carlo's assessment: our chances of rock-bottom decreased!

17th 0.2% -0.1%
18th 3.5% +1.4%
19th 17.7% +6.9%
^^^ upper quartile
20th 78.6% -8.1% median, maximum likelihood
  1. Villa: 99.8% (+0.2%)
  2. Sunderland: 96.0% (+11.1%)
  3. Bournemouth: 82.6% (+14.9%)
  4. Newcastle: 6.2% (-8.3%)
  5. Norwich: 5.3% (-20.6%)
  6. WBA: 3.9% (+0.6%)
  7. Swansea: 3.5% (+3.0%)
  8. Chelsea: 1.9% (unchanged)
  9. Liverpool: 0.8% (-1.0%)
leviramsey

These numbers assume no dramatic improvement in quality of play (including, for instance, tactics), nor any new manager bounce. Additionally, as can be seen in the recent yo-yoing of the Tyne & Wear clubs' chances, it only takes one sufficiently good result to cause things to look (at least for a time) a lot brighter.

16th 0.1% -0.3%
17th 0.3% -0.9%
18th 2.1% -1.4%
19th 10.8% -0.6%
20th 86.7% +3.2% Median, maximum likelihood
  1. Villa: 99.6% (+1.3%)
  2. Sunderland: 84.9% (+26.3%)
  3. Bournemouth: 67.7% (+12.8%)
  4. Norwich: 25.9% (+0.2%)
  5. Newcastle: 14.5% (-27.0%)
  6. WBA: 3.3% (+0.3%)
  7. Chelsea: 1.9% (+0.8%)
  8. Liverpool: 1.8% (-11.9%)
  9. Swansea: 0.5% (+0.3%)
leviramsey

The Monte Carlo results as of 30 October. The current results, Round 11, will follow in another post soon.

15th 0.1% -0.3%
16th 0.4% -0.8%
17th 1.2% -2.3%
18th 3.5% -8.6%
19th 11.4% -18.6%
20th 83.4% +30.9% Median, maximum likelihood
  1. Villa: 98.3%
  2. Sunderland: 58.6%
  3. Bournemouth: 53.9%
  4. Newcastle: 41.5%
  5. Norwich: 25.7%
  6. Liverpool: 13.7%
  7. Watford: 3.5%
  8. WBA: 3.0%
  9. Chelsea: 1.1%
  10. Everton: 0.4%
  11. Swansea: 0.2%
  12. Stoke: 0.1%
leviramsey

13th 0.1% -1.1%
14th 0.2% -2.2%
15th 0.4% -3.9%
16th 1.2% -5.7%
17th 3.5% -6.7%
18th 12.1% -2.7%
^^^ upper quartile
19th 30.0% +7.7%
20th 52.5% +15.6% Median, maximum likelihood

Barring major change, I think we're nailed-on for rock-bottom.

  1. Aston Villa: 94.6% chance of relegation
  2. Sunderland: 90.8%
  3. Bournemouth: 68.2%
  4. Norwich: 16.7%
  5. Watford: 10.1%
  6. West Brom: 8.5%
  7. Liverpool: 7.5%
  8. Newcastle: 3.3%
  9. Swansea, Stoke: 0.1%

Of course, it only takes one emphatic win to change the assessment, as Newcastle ably prove, but do we honestly see that sort of result coming from this incarnation of Villa?

leviramsey

Has the bleeding stopped?

9th 0.1% unchanged
10th 0.1% unchanged
11th 0.2% -0.1%
12th 0.6% +0.1%
13th 1.2% +0.2%
14th 2.4% +0.8%
15th 4.3% +1.5%
16th 6.9% +1.9%
17th 10.2% +1.3%
^^^ upper quartile
18th 14.8% -1.4%
19th 22.3% -4.9% Median
vvv lower quartile
20th 36.9% +0.6% Maximum likelihood

Despite the increased chance of finishing rock-bottom, our overall relegation chances decreased:

  1. Villa: 74.0% (-5.7%)
  2. Sunderland: 60.2% (-23.8%)
  3. Newcastle: 52.4% (+22.6%)
  4. Bournemouth: 40.0% (-15.0%)
  5. West Brom: 35.3% (+27.7%)
  6. Watford: 22.7% (+11.9%)
  7. Liverpool: 9.0% (-10.8%)
  8. Norwich: 3.7% (-0.3%)
  9. Stoke: 1.0% (+0.9%)
  10. Chelsea: 0.9% (+0.8%)
  11. West Ham: 0.5% (-0.3%)
  12. Swansea: 0.3% (-6.2%)
leviramsey

It's not looking great at Villa Park, is it?

9th0.1%
10th0.1%
11th0.3%
12th0.5%
13th1.0%
14th1.6%
15th2.8%
16th5.0%
17th8.9%
^^^ upper quartile
18th16.2%
19th27.2%median, maximum likelihood
vvv lower quartile
20th36.3%

I suspect that this is the most pessimistic Monte Carlo run I've ever had; right after our loss to Hull last season, our relegation probability was only around 65%. The "maximum likelihood" refers to our finish in the table that came up the most often.

Relegation chances:

  1. Sunderland: 84.0%
  2. Villa: 79.7%
  3. Bournemouth: 55.0%
  4. Newcastle: 29.8%
  5. Liverpool: 19.8%
  6. Watford: 10.8%
  7. West Brom: 7.6%
  8. Swansea: 6.5%
  9. Norwich: 4.0%
  10. Palace: 1.5%
  11. West Ham: 0.8%
  12. Stoke, Southampton, Everton, Chelsea, Arsenal: 0.1%

This is the first run of the simulation with no results from last season.  Of course, last season, Leicester were projecting to a higher chance of going down than we currently project to, so...

leviramsey

For the past few years, I've endeavored to periodically post results of Monte Carlo simulations of the remainder of the season. The process is essentially analogous to repeatedly running the BBC predictor and seeing how often various events come up.

I've decided that with the new site, it perhaps makes more sense to have this as a blog series rather than regular comments.

5th0.1%
6th0.1%
7th0.2%
8th0.3%
9th0.6%
10th0.8%
11th1.3%
12th2.2%
13th3.4%
14th5.2%
15th7.4%
^^^ upper quartile
16th10.3%
17th13.0%
18th16.3% median
19th18.1%
vvv lower quartile
20th20.7%

By my reckoning, as things stand it's about 50/50 whether we finish between 19th and 16th, with above that range being about as likely as 20th.

The table that came up most often in the simulation was:

1. Man City
2. Chelsea
3. Leicester City
4. Spurs
5. Everton
6. Man United
7. Swansea
8. Arsenal
9. West Brom
10. West Ham
11. Southampton
12. Watford
13. Crystal Palace
14. Stoke
15. Norwich
16. Bournemouth
17. Liverpool
18. Villa
19. Newcastle
20. Sunderland

Relegation chances

Sunderland 61.8%
Newcastle 55.5%
Villa 55.1%
Liverpool 48.5%
Bournemouth 33.6%
Norwich 22.9%
Stoke 11.1%
Watford 3.0%
Southampton, Crystal Palace 2.4%
West Ham 1.3%
Swansea 1.0%
West Brom 0.6%
Arsenal 0.4%
Man Utd 0.3%
Everton 0.1%
leviramsey

Picks for 10 November

YTD: 75-109, -196.45 units (-11.58%)

Panaitolikos to win -133: risk 7 units to win 5.26

NAC Breda +1 -120: risk 7 units to win 5.83

Roma to win -375: risk 9 units to win 2.40

Roma -1.5 -115: risk 8 units to win 6.95

Metalist Kharkiv to win -160: risk 5 units to win 3.12

Metalist Kharkiv -1 +120: 6 units

leviramsey

Picks for 9 November

YTD: 73-106, -189.96 units (-11.43%)

Reims to win +319: 5 units

Montpellier DNB +111: 6 units

Borussia M'gladbach to win -158: risk 6 units to win 3.79

Borussia M'gladbach -1 +112: 6 units

Real Sociedad +2 -101: risk 6 units to win 5.94

leviramsey

Picks for 26 October

YTD: 64-97, -207.97 units (-14.49%)

West Brom +1.5 -140: risk 10 units to win 7.14

Reims +1 -120: risk 8 units to win 6.66

Bayer Leverkusen to win -180: risk 12 units to win 6.66

Bayer Leverkusen -1 -105: risk 13 units to win 12.38

Twente -1 -135: risk 5 units to win 3.70

Antalyaspor DNB +140: 11 units

leviramsey

Picks for 19 October

YTD: 63-91, -161.37 units (-11.83%)

Hull +1 -105: risk 6 units to win 5.71

Southampton +1 -125: risk 8 units to win 6.40

WBA DNB +120: 6 units

Heerenveen DNB -135: risk 7 units to win 5.18

Atletico Madrid DNB -275: risk 7 units to win 2.54

leviramsey

Picks for 29 September

YTD: 61-87, -149.72 units (-11.42%)

Panaitolikos to win +265: 5 units

Heerenveen to win -125: risk 7 units to win 5.60

Heerenveen -1 +135: 6 units

Udinese DNB -110: risk 5 units to win 4.54

Torino +1 +100: 6 units

Lazio DNB -225: risk 5 units to win 2.22

Amkar Perm DNB +115: 9 units

leviramsey

Picks for 28 September

YTD: 58-81, -130.64 units (-10.43%)

Marseille DNB -130: risk 5 units to win 3.84

Man City to win -195: risk 7 units to win 3.58

Man City -1 -110: risk 7 units to win 6.36

Freiburg +2 -125: risk 7 units to win 5.60

Napoli to win -130: risk 5 units to win 3.84

PSV DNB -180: risk 6 units to win 3.33

Maritimo DNB -175: risk 5 units to win 2.85

leviramsey

Picks for 26 September

YTD: 56-77, -113.71 units (-9.61%)

Amkar Perm DNB -175: risk 6 units to win 3.42

Betis to win +295: 7 units

Betis DNB +189: 11 units

Celta de Vigo DNB +155: 6 units

Espanyol +1 -150: risk 10 units to win 6.66



  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • According to that now infamous article it's one of Bruce's trademarks.
    • If Hutton, Gabby and Richards were out for a long time Bruce would say they were our best players last year just to prove what good job he's doing under atrocious circumstances!! 
    • Paul Devlin co-commentating on WM at the scum game. He's the epitome of boring **** Brummy. Not as bad as Tony Bomber Brown though.
    • If he could arrive at small heath in a clown car that falls apart as he gets out,  that would be great. Just to get a baseline for future tactical development and overall team progress and improvement.  Keep right on words removed, no really keep it up.
    • Too much of a disruptive influence on everyone. No, he's injured.
    • £15 m and one year later he's off to the prison colonies on the other side of the world?  Worst signing in club history. 
    • It’s been reported what he’s said -  “During a meeting with the midfielders’ unit of players, of which I was not present, MS [Sampson] used an analogy about pressing hard in midfield and getting a caution like a police caution. MS then addressed the player individually and said in relation to being cautioned by police: ‘Haven’t you been arrested before? Four times isn’t it?’” Dave Reddin, head of performance, as part of an information-gathering exercise last year, added: “This comment about the player was made with derogatory, racial and prejudicial connotations. “It was also a defamatory, untrue statement given that the player has never been arrested and MS’s comment indicates an assumption (subconscious or conscious) that being mixed race from London suggests a criminal record with the police. “Although I was not present at the meeting, other players confirmed MS made this comment. Other players confirmed the comment was not received as a joke and created an awkward atmosphere in the room. I was deeply concerned about this comment and felt it was highly inappropriate for the national team coach to make such a sweeping negative generalisation about a new player in the team.” https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/08/16/mark-sampson-accused-remark-racial-prejudicial-connotations/amp/ “We were in the hotel. Everybody was excited. It was a big game. On the wall, there was a list of the family and friends who were coming to watch us and I just happened to be next to Mark. He asked me if I had anyone who would be there and I said I had family coming over from Nigeria. ‘Oh,’ he said. ‘Nigeria? Make sure they don’t bring Ebola with them” https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/aug/21/eni-aluko-england-manager-mark-sampson-ebola He’s been sacked for inappropriate conduct at Bristol that became more apparent to the FA after investigating the Aluko claims anyway, so it’s totally irrelevant.
    • Kodija will be gone for a start.
    • I wanted to lose against Boro, I thought that would be it for him but now I'm not convinced and I just couldn't bring myself to continue wanting it. I enjoyed the Barnsley win and I feel very confident for today and the next few games. I desperately want out of this league.