Luckiest and Unluckiest batsmen

[marc71178]

As I say, it's not realistically possible to look at a reasonable-sized sample from that.

So therefore it's not realistically possible to call it a valid tool.

 

[Camel56]

Yes, I do - the grasp needed for stuff like this is not complicated, it's very basic.

Yes its basic when your analysis is basic. Your basic analysis means it is not particularly accurate. Come back when you have taken account of other factors, found the statistical signifigance of these factors, done a multiple regression analysis on it, checked for correlation of factors etc and when youve done all that let us know your results and how you came to them and then you will have proved or disproved something in a statistically significant fashion.
Until then, stop acting like a know-all pratt and accept that you are out of your depth on this one.

 

[Richard]

So therefore it's not realistically possible to call it a valid tool.

Yes, it is - it's just not possible to call it a foolproof one.

 

[Richard]

Yes its basic when your analysis is basic. Your basic analysis means it is not particularly accurate. Come back when you have taken account of other factors, found the statistical signifigance of these factors, done a multiple regression analysis on it, checked for correlation of factors etc and when youve done all that let us know your results and how you came to them and then you will have proved or disproved something in a statistically significant fashion.
Until then, stop acting like a know-all pratt and accept that you are out of your depth on this one.

It's rather hard to be out of your depth in water maybe toe-deep.

 

[Camel56]

Give it up you clown. You are a know-all pratt who is quite often wrong but cant admit it. Your analysis is flawed and takes into account very few of the factors that actually effect how many runs are scored after a let off.
I feel very sorry for your parents.

 

[Pinkline Jones]

Surely Camel a detailed letter to Brennan is warranted here. You must be howlin' on this bloke.

 

[Camel56]

I certainly am Jonesy. Young Richard never really had it but he's totally lost my support now. If i ever meet him in real life ill pull his ****ing ears!

 

[Pinkline Jones]

I simply told him I wouldn't do it Camel. Sick and tired of propping up the b*dy station.

 

[Ray Hadley]

Jones and Camel. You two plodlodytes skipping work again?

About time you made a useful contribution and ignored a few of these forums.

 

[Camel56]

You've lost my support after that comment Ray.

 

[Richard]

Give it up you clown. You are a know-all pratt who is quite often wrong but cant admit it.

Nope, you've never found any conclusive proof that I've been wrong on anything. I've wiped the floor with you several times, though.

Your analysis is flawed and takes into account very few of the factors that actually effect how many runs are scored after a let off.

Nope, it doesn't - all that affects runs scored after let-offs is how well the batsman plays from that delivery onwards.

I feel very sorry for your parents.

Good, good - good job you know sod-all about that like you do about every single other thing you've tried to know anything about in terms of me.

 

[Camel56]

Wrong as usual Richard Cranium, there are plenty of other things that effect how many the batsmen will score. His average, style of play, standard of bowling he faces, fielding standard etc etc. ITs these things that mean you need a far greater analysis than the one that you have attempted to do. Do you know what multiple regression is? Look it up, learn how to run one and then come back with the results you pimply-faced plodder.
Back to you drawing board you uphill gardening gnome.

 

[Ray Hadley]

Pull his F@$kin' ears for him Camel.

 

[Richard]

Wrong as usual Richard Cranium, there are plenty of other things that effect how many the batsmen will score. His average, style of play, standard of bowling he faces, fielding standard etc etc.

Well observed - and of course these are so easy to quantify, aren't they?

ITs these things that mean you need a far greater analysis than the one that you have attempted to do.

And of course all of them have an effect on dropped catches and Umpiring reprieves, don't they?

Do you know what multiple regression is?

"Multiple regression is used to account for (predict) the variance in an interval dependent, based on linear combinations of interval, dichotomous, or dummy independent variables. Multiple regression can establish that a set of independent variables explainsa proportion of the variance in a dependent variable at a significant level (significance test of R2), and can establish the relative predictive importance of the independent variables (comparing beta weights). Power terms can be added as independent variables to explore curvilinear effects. Cross-product terms can be added as independent variables to explore interaction effects. One can test the significance of difference of two R2's to determine if adding an independent variable to the model helps significantly. Using hierarchical regression, one can see how must variance in the dependent can be explained by one or a set of new independent variables, over and above that explained by an earlier set. Of course, the estimates (b coefficients and constant) can be used to construct a prediction equation and generate predicted scores on a variable for further analysis."
And as far as I can see, totally inconsequential.