can you provide the bulk data to back up your claim so we can all analyze the probabilities?Originally Posted by ExiledRed
can you provide the bulk data to back up your claim so we can all analyze the probabilities?
So, Tom Anselmi's vision... well... not his... he doesn't have a vision... but in watching the guys he hired to implement someone else's vision.... his allocation of resources to support the other guys is based on their idea of changing the way the game is played in North America.
Note to Tom Anselmi, while changing the way it's played is fine the rules are still the same. Lowest score doesn't win.
An excellent point, and one I didn't think of, but would also apply to the kids who were promised to be signed by Cochrane and then passed over. He should take responsibility for that fiasco as well.
So let's see if you're right. Realistically there are 16 possible outcomes of wednesdays game (there are obviously more but the odds of either team netting 4 is super low). First score is tfc second is montreals:
0-0
1-0
0-1
1-1
2-0
2-1
2-2
1-2
0-2
3-0
3-1
3-2
3-3
2-3
1-3
0-3
So after the 0-0 draw the only way for tfc to win is to actually win the game and there are 6 possible scores to do that. Another 0-0 draw puts us into extra time then possibly penalties. Everything else is a loss. So 6 win scenarios, 9 loss, and 1 tie.
Had we lost 2-1 the only way we could advance would be to win 1-0, 2-0, 3-0, or 3-1. A 2-1 victory ties it up and off to extra and penalties. Basically the 2-1 score simply eliminates the possibility of a 3-2 victory at home leading to a win. This score leads to 4 win scenarios, 11 loss, and 1 tie. So your first argument has just been proven wrong.
Had we lost 3-2 the only way we could advance would be to win 1-0, 2-0, 2-1, 3-0, 3-1. A 3-2 Victory ties it up and any ties are a loss. This score leads to 5 win scenarios, 10 loss, and 1 tie. Again proven wrong.
Good analysis KGH.
In the end, its an aggregate score 2-game series. So while 0-0 isn't the greatest result, it is still better than being down a goal. The away goal rule only applies when the aggregate score is tied.
The bottom line is that we need to win on Tuesday.
---------
In the past I've seen stats of 2nd leg outcomes vs. 1st leg outcomes, but I can't find them anywhere on the net.
people put way too much emphasis on away goals. a win is still ALWAYS better than a draw and a draw is ALWAYS better than a loss. Aggregate score is a lot more important than away goals. If one team leads on aggregate, the away goals mean NOTHING.
I am glad someone actually took the time to put into words what I was thinking.
If I could rep that KGH, I would. So since I'm just an RU, I'll give you an old school "this^^^"
It seems like there never was a time we needed to go into Montreal and win by 4 to advance....
To further hammer home the fallacy of the statement that a loss is better than a draw.
TFCDraws 1st Leg Scores
2nd Leg 0-0 1-2 2-3
0-0 --- E/T N - N
1-1 --- N - N - N
2-2 --- N - N - N
3-3+--- N - N - N
TFC Wins 1st Leg Scores
2nd Leg 0-0 1-2 2-3
1-0 --- Y - Y - Y
2-0 --- Y - Y - Y
2-1 --- Y - E/T Y
3-0 --- Y - Y - Y
3-1 --- Y - Y - Y
3-2 --- Y - N - E/T
If TFC Loses 2nd Leg then they are out in any of the sample 1st leg scenarios.
So:
With the 0-0 draw, 0-0 2nd leg keeps them alive for extra time, and any winning scenario gets them through.
When dealing with a loss by away goal, any 2nd leg draw sees them OUT and SOME of the winning scenarios gets them through.
So by losing you always have less options.
Last edited by SirBobSaget; 05-05-2012 at 10:02 AM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Great love does not exist without joy and without great suffering ,that's why One club is worth only as much as its fans !