Significance of the 'second innings denial' effect.

[TheJediBrah]

In some ways Mr Miyagi is the sensible one here. We're the crazy ones still trying to reason with him when it's clearly pointless.

 

[Mr Miyagi]

In some ways Mr Miyagi is the sensible one here. We're the crazy ones still trying to reason with him when it's clearly pointless.

This is what I was telling you when you said previously my logic was good and facts were accurate.

:P

If logic is valid, and facts are accurate, then if your intuition tells you its wrong without countering logic and weight issues, your intuition is far far far more likely wrong. :P

8 overs

/thread

Lets move on to 4th innings batting and bowling averages already. I couldn't give two hoots about wpm

 

[Starfighter]

Are you Blocky? Seriously? You have missed the point so many times, and your writing styles are not too dissimilar.

 

[Starfighter]

Seriously, not once have you properly addressed the question which I framed in the opening post.

 

[Mr Miyagi]

Are you Blocky? Seriously? You have missed the point so many times, and your writing styles are not too dissimilar.

How have I missed the point when JediBrah agrees with me?

I am not Blocky. I am Mr Miyagi. Wax on wax off.

 

[Mr Miyagi]

Seriously, not once have you properly addressed the question which I framed in the opening post.

Glorious!

Read JediBrah's earlier post where he agrees with me. "No arguments here" iirc.

JediBrah's concession of "no argument" in the face of facts and logic is far better than your continued denial imo.

But that's just my opinion.

Move onto 4th innings batting and bowling averages or bowling in packs already

 

[Starfighter]

In some ways Mr Miyagi is the sensible one here. We're the crazy ones still trying to reason with him when it's clearly pointless.

Here's the thing: what kind of a person likes posts that are making fun of them?

 

[Mr Miyagi]

Here's the thing: what kind of a person likes posts that are making fun of them?

I think this is a subject for a new thread. Probably off cricket. Put it in "Off Topic" and you may have many suggestions given to you.

 

[Starfighter]

Glorious!

Read JediBrah's earlier post where he agrees with me. "No arguments here" iirc.

JediBrah's concession of "no argument" in the face of facts and logic is far better than your continued denial imo.

But that's just my opinion.

Move onto 4th innings batting and bowling averages or bowling in packs already

Well, yeah no arguments here. We talked about this ad nauseam the other day and no one disagreed that your hypothetical scenario where Hadlee played in a team with much stronger batsmen but not much stronger bowlers then he might have had a higher wpm.

It's the inverse of saying that if McGrath played in a team with much weaker bowling, but still the same batting then his wpm could have been way higher. It's not really a meaningful discussion, it's a contrived example to try and fit a premise.

Is that what the actual discussion was about though? Wasn't it about it's significance relative to other factors? And why are we only talking about batting strength and not bowling strength?

How is your hypothetical in anyway practically relevant?

This is where you fail.

 

[Mr Miyagi]

This is where you fail.

No.

I saw the "no arguments here" and saw that he gets it.

As for the rest of the posts - that's JediBrah - I don't expect niceties or even decency as against face saving from him.

He once asked me if English was my first language. So - JediBrah is JediBrah. I don't even point out to him that he repeatedly uses "premise" and "hypothesis" incorrectly as against "conclusion" or "theory".

He is what he is. I could have pasted where he did earlier argue against what he said that he never did, but I cbf as he finally got it. I was happy that I finally got him there (although it required data as he wouldn't accept the logic in the abstract).

 

[cnerd123]

Here's the thing: what kind of a person likes posts that are making fun of them?

I do it

They're mean but sometimes funny

 

[Starfighter]

No.

I saw the "no arguments here" and saw that he gets it.

As for the rest of post - that's JediBrah - I don't expect niceties from him.

Hey kiddo, I think I know TJB's posting a little better than you.

That you'd clearly ignore the pertinent part of the post is so up your alley.

Since I think you're doing nothing here but stringing me like the good troll you are I think I'll stop.

 

[Mr Miyagi]

Hey kiddo, I think I know TJB's posting a little better than you.

That you'd clearly ignore the pertinent part of the post is so up your alley.

Since I think you're doing nothing here but stringing me like the good troll you are I think I'll stop.

Streak and Hadlee average 8 overs in the 4th innings. JediBrah sees it and agreed with it. Whoop.

Lets move onto 4th innings batting and bowling averages already (or pack bowling with wickets at both ends and more balls to new unset batsmen). It is the next step. Logically.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I could have pasted where he did earlier argue against what he said that he never did, but I cbf as he finally got it. I was happy that I finally got him there (although it required data as he wouldn't accept the logic in the abstract).

you actually think that don't you? wow

 

[Mr Miyagi]

you actually think that don't you? wow

Your conclusions are based purely on your hypothesis and have already been proved wrong with hard statistical data. Hypothesis =/= fact. But you clearly don't understand this so let's try a different route.

Why do you think McGrath has wpm of 4.5 and Hadlee has a wpm of 5 if playing in a weaker team leads to a higher wpm?

For a great bowler, playing in a weaker team = higher wpm. That is a statistical fact. No amount of trying to reason away the facts will change it.

Heath Streak.

Shall I carry on pasting?

I know that you get it now. But lets not rewrite history - there's plenty of posts against you not getting it before. So many.

You previously reduced team strength into one instead of separating batting strength from bowling strength and looking at them as independent variables. I repeat, I know that you get it now.

 

[Starfighter]

you actually think that don't you? wow

It's incredible isn't it? Real postmodern stuff.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Heath Streak.

Shall I carry on pasting?

I know that you get it now. But lets not rewrite history - there's plenty of posts against you not getting it before. So many.

You reduced team strength into one instead of separating batting strength from bowling strength.

No one, ever, didn't get what you were saying. It was just never relevant. You were told this, and explained it dozens and dozens of times but you kept repeating the same irrelevant example, reasoning and stats over and over regardless as if people didn't understand.

At this point you still have made absolutely no progress whatsoever and it's just sad

 

[Mr Miyagi]

It's incredible isn't it? Real postmodern stuff.

Starfighter, either way, JediBrah now agrees with me that batting matters and is significant with Hadlee and Streak bowling 8 overs in the 4th.

So the only issue is whether you do or not?

 

[Mr Miyagi]

No one, ever, didn't get what you were saying. It was just never relevant. You were told this, and explained it dozens and dozens of times but you kept repeating the same irrelevant example, reasoning and stats over and over regardless as if people didn't understand.

At this point you still have made absolutely no progress whatsoever and it's just sad

Competition for wickets is just as relevant or significant to be observed in impacting wpm as not bowling much in the 4th due to runs.

I'm glad you get this now. Or before. Or whenever. I really don't care when you did get it.

But it is relevant. It is isginificant. Look at the very very very first post in this thread before using the word "irrelevant"'

If something effects wpm potential it is relevant. End of.

 

[Starfighter]

No one, ever, didn't get what you were saying. It was just never relevant. You were told this, and explained it dozens and dozens of times but you kept repeating the same irrelevant example, reasoning and stats over and over regardless as if people didn't understand.

At this point you still have made absolutely no progress whatsoever and it's just sad

Surely he must be stringing us along? But then again the internet does surprise in its wonders, so maybe he does believe that. It's just... it's sort of like if you were doing question for, say, uni and you write something wonderful and clear with brilliant detail and seamless logic and so on but you get zero marks because you didn't actually address the question.