Soxbadger

Im most likely going to lose this week due to a fluke Carson Palmer to DHB touchdown. Good news is that next week I add Andre Johnson and Willis McGahee.

regardless of the OL, cutler has been terrible protecting the ball.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Oct 26, 2012 -> 11:08 PM) bro stick with Matlock. you ain't no actuary or stats guy. Dont worry, I have felled far greater trees than you. Keep your head up, there just is no way you are beating me in an internet debate. Your best line is resorting to comparing me to a famous television show, which is pretty much a compliment because (I actually have never seen the show) I am pretty sure that Matlock was successful. Maybe next time compare me to Lionel Hutz, that would have made more sense.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Oct 26, 2012 -> 06:16 PM) if i have an actuary predicting 70%-80% outcomes on a macro scale and is wrong consistently that's less than optimal. For example if I have an actuary predicting with 80% certainty that a combined loss ratio in a property/casualty cycle will be at 95% with their tables, and they miss at 105% every time... not good. But we still have random major catastrophic loses; is the tea party in 2010 Silver's cat loss? Very possible. I just need more wins from Mr.Silver before I give him his (rightful - earned) place as a statistical modeler. anyways votes are predicted in the millions not 1 to 1. You are not predicting one persons vote, or one person to die (in your example). you are predicting the overall trend with a macro outcome which you can abstractly apply to that 1. The part you seem to not understand is Im not talking about voters being 1 to 1, Im talking about the results. Silver has only predicted 1 presidential election. When you are talking about millions of people and their life expectancy, you have millions of deaths to base it on. Thus you can find trends and see if the model is working. When you have a model that can be tested only 1 time every 4 years it is almost impossible to tell if the model is working. Which is why I compared it to them predicting my death. Because they only have 1 shot at being right, not millions of deaths to be right within a certain tolerance. More wins or losses require more games being played. When you work with actuaries you know that they need lots of results. There havent even been 100 elections, its just an impossibly small sample size with a ridiculous amount of variables. Once again, not talking about voters, talking about how many elections there are to try and gauge a model thats purpose is to predict the outcome of presidential elections.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Oct 26, 2012 -> 03:27 PM) well i am going to have to disagree. they are useful in business to find patterns in data to zero in on opportunities for financial gain. also, anyone would also be hard pressed to say that the actuary sciences are not important to the insurance industry. we are talking about serious business here, not some Matlock courtroom drama. lol You change the goal posts every time. Who said that stats arent useful for business? There is a difference between being useful and being correct. Information is king in business and the more you have, the better off you likely are. But ask any actuary if they can with 100% accuracy predict when I die, and they would say no. Ask any actuary how sure they can be relying on statistics based on opinions. Once again, statistics have a use. But you were attacking Silver for not being right, which is just simply not understanding what statistics are for. /shrugs

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Oct 26, 2012 -> 03:07 PM) statistical predictive models are legitimate, not some voodoo science you think it is. False which is why they are not allowed in court rooms as they are inherently unreliable. IE: Lets pretend its a fact 40% of people have committed a crime. Lets pretend we have 10 people on stage. It is not a fact that 4 of those people have committed a crime. I dont care who wins. Both candidates will equally pander to me. Republican, Democrat, it doesnt matter, they both want me to join their club.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Oct 26, 2012 -> 02:31 PM) In 2012 it looks like he will be at a 75% chance of an Obama win. If he's wrong again, of course it's statistically possibly that he has a great system but had the bad luck of hitting the 30% in 2010 and the 25% in 2012. Or maybe he's just not that good. There is only 1 election. Statistic models are built to predict the more likely outcome, predicting the actual outcome is fortunetelling and I assume if Nate Silver was a fortuneteller he wouldnt need to write to make a living. There is a 50% chance that a coin on any given flip will land heads or tails. Even if it is heads 100 times in a row, it doesnt mean that my model is bad, it just means that there is randomness in any equation. And this statement: Is just false as intrade has Obama trending up over the last 2 days to 63.5% from 55.5%. When I read your posts I feel like your a Packers fan pretending to be a Bears fan. "I love the Bears, but they arent even close to as good as the Packers." Its like you think saying your not voting for Romney will bolster your credibility.

Here are power rankings. Spoiler, Missouri not in them. http://flapship.com/ncaa-football-power-rankings-week-9/

2010 was not a presidential election. I dont even have to research the stats to know that presidential elections have a higher turn out. Id guess that Democrats are something like +2% in Presidential elections due to the higher voter turnout. http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2012...-win-university The Colorado model is not based on voting, its based on economic numbers. That would be the reason it could be way off, as it would seem the model is predicated on assessing how bad the economy is, as opposed to the candidates chances of winning. Its worked from 1980 on, but it would be interesting to see if it predicted right during depressions or other economic down turns.

Wisconsin is a difficult one to call because of their voting laws. Bush v. Gore was razor thin http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.p...5&year=2000 and I always felt the difference was Dane County (where University of Wisconsin is located.) I dont see Romney winning, Obama has to many big population states already in the bag. Almost everything has to go right for Romney to even win, let alone landslide.

I dont care.

To clarify, I dont care what they think. But part of my job is keeping secrets and not letting other people get damaging information. If they cant do that in their personal life, it makes it difficult for me to believe they can do it in their professional life. I know most people arent has anti-publicity as me, but I like that trait.

I dont mix business and online at all. I have no facebook, no linkedin, nothing. If you search my name online you come up with business related things only. Would I judge someone based on the internet of course. The first thing I do when I get a resume is search them online to see how easy I can dig up dirt. I always search opposing counsels to see what I can find. I love knowing more about someone else than they know about me.

So I dont know where to put this, but on an internet news site today there was an article about a company I helped. I personally think its a huge scam, but seems they are getting publicity. Kind of scary.

My friend who trained with Shark Boy at Shark Tank is going to be writing some wrestling wrecaps (trademark pending) for us. Feel free to take a gander. http://flapship.com/your-monday-night-raw-wrecap/

Id say nay, seems unnecessary and are you really going to want to rely on Roth/Rivers on important weeks?

What arethe scoring settings? Because Brady is usually a safe play.

I thought it was some stupid video where Trump fires an Obama impersonator.

I really dislike this argument so to answer the question. Amendment process needs super majority to ensure that mere majority cant trample on minority rights. Im pretty sure you are looking for Federalist Paper 10 partially about Tyranny of the Majority.

Youre a sick man.

A lot of anger towards the system in this thread. My only hope is that one day my generation will be the ones in power and that we wont sell out future America for a few dollars today. Not overly optimistic.

BEAR STRONG

id say just put in campbell because im not sure cutler gives you the best chance to win.

Cutler in game

I just go with my gut, the worst feeling is believing in someone else and being wrong.