When to do it

[Superjack]

15 hours ago, Fontaineofallknowledge said:

With respect we wouldn't be able to enjoy it if a lot of people on here had their way!

Or we may have enjoyed more. 

Fontaineofallconjecture more like.

[Red-Robbo]

2 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

To quote John Maynard Keynes - “When the facts change, I change my mind”.

 

 

Correctly quoting a personal hero.

 

[Northern Red]

33 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Cheers, that’s an interesting angle. Is the GW19 ending around the WBA game? That was really the nadir of Niges reign and - can I say it - relegation form?

I think what it probably shows is that these players (much like a lot of teams in the division) can go on hot streaks. Realistically man for man and squad for squad there’s not a lot between 4th and 18th, it’s about getting them to hit that form regularly (or conversely not hitting the opposite of that form regularly) - that’s the challenge 

Game 9 was Norwich away (lost 3-2), Game 19 was Sheff Utd at home (lost 1-0). If you extend it to the West Brom game (24) when the calls to sack Nige came to a head, then it was 13 points from 16 games.

25 (Millwall away) to 33 (Hull at home) saw 17 points in 9, then 34 (Cardiff away) to 43 (Sheff Utd away) saw 9 points in 10.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022–23_Bristol_City_F.C._season#Results_by_round

Edited April 11 by Northern Red

[Superjack]

2 hours ago, Wanderingred said:

Calling for Manning to be sacked was pointless. We all know the real reason we are stagnating as a club and it’s not the manager. Sack him and then what? They’ll only make another appointment that satisfies their agenda. May as well give the guy a proper go at it.

Now, this is true.

[transfer reader]

21 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

If you look at a rolling ten game period of form then we've been in definite relegation form (ie tracking at below 1.0ppg across 10 games) after three matches this season. Those were the three consecutive losses between 24 Feb and 5 March being: Sheff Wed (0.9), Cardiff, (0.8), and Ipswich (0.8).

All other complete ten game blocks across the season have us at 1ppg or above.

Yes and no 

Yes, that level of ppg is what would likely get you relegated at the end of the season, but it is only relegation form if over the same number of games (rolling 10 in this case) there aren't 3 teams who are worse.

Teams have stayed up with under 1 ppg before (Reading 21/22, Derby 20/21, Millwall 18/19, Reading and Bolton 17/18), because 3 teams were worse than that.

That's 5 times in the last 6 completed seasons.

Edited April 11 by transfer reader

[mozo]

3 minutes ago, transfer reader said:

Yes and no 

Yes, that level of ppg is what would likely get you relegated at the end of the season, but it is only relegation form if over the same number of games (rolling 10 in this case) there aren't 3 teams who are worse.

Teams have stayed up with under 1 ppg before (Reading 21/22, Derby 20/21, Millwall 18/19, Reading and Bolton 17/18), because 3 teams were worse than that.

That's 5 times in the last 6 completed seasons.

A better phrase would have been shit form  

[ExiledAjax]

4 minutes ago, transfer reader said:

Yes and no 

Yes, that level of ppg is what would likely get you relegated at the end of the season, but it is only relegation form if over the same number of games (rolling 10 in this case) there aren't 3 teams who are worse.

Teams have stayed up with under 1 ppg before (Reading 21/22, Derby 20/21, Millwall 18/19, Reading and Bolton 17/18), because 3 teams were worse than that.

That's 5 times in the last 6 completed seasons.

The average total required to stay up over the past 15 seasons is 44.5 points. That is 0.97ppg.

Therefore on average anything less than that is relegation form.

The precise points tally that the team in 22nd has from time to time doesn't really matter as it's so transient. In the autumn all 3 teams at the bottom were running at less than 0.5ppg, a few weeks ago it was looking like you might need 49 to stay up.

But, in both cases, a team would have been demonstrating "relegation form" if it had been running at 0.8ppg.

[transfer reader]

11 minutes ago, mozo said:

A better phrase would have been shit form  

Couldn't argue with that

2 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

The average total required to stay up over the past 15 seasons is 44.5 points. That is 0.97ppg.

Therefore on average anything less than that is relegation form.

The precise points tally that the team in 22nd has from time to time doesn't really matter as it's so transient. In the autumn all 3 teams at the bottom were running at less than 0.5ppg, a few weeks ago it was looking like you might need 49 to stay up.

But, in both cases, a team would have been demonstrating "relegation form" if it had been running at 0.8ppg.

Only if there weren't 3 teams with a worse ppg over the same games.

 

A team could pick up 1 point every 10 games, as long as 3 teams aren't getting any then they're doing better than those 3. 

In this league it's only 3 down, so 4th worst isn't relegation form, regardless of the number at the time.

[Malvern Red]

1 hour ago, transfer reader said:

Uncontroversial, but factually incorrect by any equitable and standard use of a form guide.

After several patronising and condescending posts from yourself, yes.

As well as continual dishonesty.

I hope you do lay off the meth. 

If we’re talking about long term evidence based statistical form I would say Silvio Dante is a superb contributor to this forum so calling him a liar and a meth user is just a tad unfair although I actually agree with your argument on this specific topic 

[transfer reader]

4 minutes ago, Malvern Red said:

If we’re talking about long term evidence based statistical form I would say Silvio Dante is a superb contributor to this forum so calling him a liar and a meth user is just a tad unfair although I actually agree with your argument on this specific topic 

I respect what you are saying however;

1. Silvio was being intentionally dishonest with the data used, which is why I kept pointing out the difference in games played for the latest table Silvio used.

I say intentionally, because I corrected it multiple times and Silvio persisted with it.

Intentional dishonesty, deceit or whatever description is lying.

2. The 'meth user' was their attempt to try and insult me, I simply turned it back around at them after multiple patronising comments from them.

Edited April 11 by transfer reader

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

1 hour ago, TV Tom said:

Leeds have only taken 1 point from a possible six in the last 2 games............... Relegation form

Two games isn't form, is it? Compared to 14 games where we took less than a point per game, this is awful. In the last 18, we were on 1.2 points per game because of the uptick in form, but that is still less than average.   Over the season, we're at 1.3 ppg. I'd like to see us picking up 1.5+ ppg. That gives us a good season plus a chance of the playoffs if we can edge towards 1.6/1.7; for reference, 2+ ppg is top-4 form. 

[ExiledAjax]

1 hour ago, transfer reader said:

Only if there weren't 3 teams with a worse ppg over the same games.

A team could pick up 1 point every 10 games, as long as 3 teams aren't getting any then they're doing better than those 3. 

In this league it's only 3 down, so 4th worst isn't relegation form, regardless of the number at the time.

I can't agree that the standard of one team's form is defined by the form of all the others. That means the measure and definition of form is circular and that the yardstick is constantly moving.

Form when discussed as indicating the expected end of season achievement of any team - be it promotion, relegation, or otherwise - has to be discussed in the context of wider averages.

For example, right now we're at 13 points in 6 games. That's top 2 form. Even arguably title-winning form. It won't get you that this season, but it's right up there in terms of what a team can reasonably be expected to achieve

[TV Tom]

34 minutes ago, Lorenzos Only Goal said:

Two games isn't form, is it? Compared to 14 games where we took less than a point per game, this is awful. In the last 18, we were on 1.2 points per game because of the uptick in form, but that is still less than average.   Over the season, we're at 1.3 ppg. I'd like to see us picking up 1.5+ ppg. That gives us a good season plus a chance of the playoffs if we can edge towards 1.6/1.7; for reference, 2+ ppg is top-4 form. 

It was said with tongue firmly in cheek, I didn’t need a maths lesson 

[transfer reader]

Just now, ExiledAjax said:

I can't agree that the standard of one team's form is defined by the form of all the others. That means the measure and definition of form is circular and that the yardstick is constantly moving.

Form when discussed as indicating the expected end of season achievement of any team - be it promotion, relegation, or otherwise - has to be discussed in the context of wider averages.

For example, right now we're at 13 points in 6 games. That's top 2 form. Even arguably title-winning form. It won't get you that this season, but it's right up there in terms of what a team can reasonably be expected to achieve

But in reality it is always moving.

If it was a points threshold where any team below that threshold was relegated, then a hard 'under X ppg is relegation form' would be correct.

But that isn't the case. What determines relegation is whether you are able to outperform at least 3 other teams over the season.

This is why some years 1.1 ppg hasn't been enough, and others 0.9 ppg has been.

If every game ended in a draw for 5 weeks, would that mean all the teams were showing relegation form? Or just that it was a selection of very evenly matched fixtures (likely with a handful of games where a team didn't capitalise fully).

Our current form is top 2 form because it's the 2nd best over the last 6 games.

Yes, wider context of averages are relevant to get an idea of a target amount. But that doesn't mean you discount how other teams are performing, because that's more relevant than what the points needed for safety over the last Y years is.

A complacent 'as long as we're above 1 ppg' approach would have seen teams relegated in 2016-17. 

You can set numbers to define good, bad, indifferent form, but relegation, playoff, promotion and title form is always relative and always changing.

[downendcity]

4 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

To quote John Maynard Keynes - “When the facts change, I change my mind”.

Sort of reminds me of this interview with Matt Damon - about Tom Cruise.

 

[Dredd]

Given it's my post that's been dug back out of page 8 or wherever it had dropped to, I'll give my thoughts. 
 

Would I have sacked him? Yes  

Am I pleased that he's turned it around and I've watched City beat Leicester Plymouth and Blackburn in the last 4 games? Obviously.

Am I convinced that form was just a blip and Manning is now the right man to take us forward? Not at all. But we will see. I hope he is the right man because success for LM means success for Bristol City and ultimately that's what we all want right?

As for digging the post out to 'gloat', well that's your prerogative. We saw the same type of thing every time Max cost us a goal when the Bentley brigade would come storming back to tell us how bad a decision it was to let him go and how Max was no good. Ultimately someone's going to be right or wrong in the end once you post an opinion on a football forum. Liams going to take us to the promised land or he isn't. Having been a City fan for nearly 40 years unfortunately I know where I'd put my money. 
 

PS there are some 'why the hell have we appointed Steve Cotterill' or 'Lee Johnsons taking us up' posts if you want to go back far enough to really rub some salt into some wounds.  

[mozo]

10 minutes ago, Dredd said:

PS there are some 'why the hell have we appointed Steve Cotterill' or 'Lee Johnsons taking us up' posts if you want to go back far enough to really rub some salt into some wounds.  

That's a great suggestion, I'm just going to dig them out now and indulge in some after timer ridicule 

[ExiledAjax]

25 minutes ago, transfer reader said:

Our current form is top 2 form because it's the 2nd best over the last 6 games.

But you've said that relegation form is measured across a season, but promotion form is measured in a 6 game block?

27 minutes ago, transfer reader said:

What determines relegation is whether you are able to outperform at least 3 other teams over the season.

But over a season, 0.8ppg, which is form we have shown this season, would give us 37 points. Wouldn't that relegated us this season when 22 other teams already have more than that?

So by your own definition we were in relegation form.

You're arguing with yourself mate.

[transfer reader]

9 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

But you've said that relegation form is measured across a season, but promotion form is measured in a 6 game block?

But over a season, 0.8ppg, which is form we have shown this season, would give us 37 points. Wouldn't that relegated us this season when 22 other teams already have more than that?

So by your own definition we were in relegation form.

You're arguing with yourself mate.

No, you're missing what I said 

 

Our form is top 2 form because it's literally top 2 in the form table.

If it was bottom 3 of the form table it would be relegation form.

That's been my point from the start.

You're adding in ppg, form is always relative to the performances of other teams, but you're ignoring that.

 

Even in those quotes where you've claimed I'm arguing with myself you've ******* misread.

There's literally no more ways for me to state this, I don't know why you're struggling with reading so much.

 

For those struggling to understand, below the red line = relegation form.

 

Edited April 11 by transfer reader

[Silvio Dante]

52 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

But you've said that relegation form is measured across a season, but promotion form is measured in a 6 game block?

But over a season, 0.8ppg, which is form we have shown this season, would give us 37 points. Wouldn't that relegated us this season when 22 other teams already have more than that?

So by your own definition we were in relegation form.

You're arguing with yourself mate.

Indeed. Basic facts here:

- Over the six games pre Easter we were on 0.5 ppg

- Over the five games pre Easter we were on 0.6 ppg

- From the period Jan 1st - Easter we were on 0.85 ppg

- But acknowledge that’s 13 games. So taking it forward one (losing Millwall) it’s 0.92 ppg from 12 games

- Based on our form throughout this year, or even in accepted “6 game blocks” the maximum points we’d get based on our ppg was 43

- Therefore, our form, if replicated over a season, would have seen us in the relegation zone this year even on the best case scenario

- Arguing otherwise relies on a flawed assumption - that if we didn’t improve, no other teams would also improve. Thats not how relegation form works. Relegation form works on if you extrapolated your current run (pick 6, 12 games whatever) over the course of the season is it likely you would go down

- The average points needed for survival in the championship over the last 10 years is 43.9. Dip below that for a sustained period (which 6 games/12 games is), you’re in relegation form

- If you want to look glass half full, once in those 10 years (and the lowest total) to stay up would be 38 points. We’d hit that in the 12/13 game block pre Easter.

- However that season was an anomaly (as was the high points relegation in the 50s). And as we know teams in the relegation zone already have 43 with 4 to play, the survival target will be above average

(And for avoidance of doubt, no, we wouldn’t have been in relegation form if you extrapolated over the whole of Liams reign - but form is by definition a sample of a current period - and as shown earlier based on the blocks of six we were regressing)

Thats all that’s being said here. It doesn’t matter that other clubs were in worse form at that time - if we had replicated that 6/12 game form over the course of the season (both based on 10 year average and this season) its relegation. Ipso Facto - we were in relegation form

The final point is this. There is a lot of stating give Liam 10-12 games next season, so by definition a lot of the forum think it’s a reasonable sample. If we have a best case of 0.92 ppg, after those 12 games, I’d bet that people would be worrying about relegation.

No agenda. No massaging of figures. No selective data. Those are just the numbers.

[Superjack]

2 hours ago, TV Tom said:

It was said with tongue firmly in cheek, I didn’t need a maths lesson 

You really are quite arrogant, aren't you?

[Davefevs]

OMG, what a thread.

The very simple point, it’s relevant to Bristol City ONLY, is that in a batch of games for Bristol City ONLY the number of points gained can show that if extrapolated across the 46 game season would lead to relegation (or promotion on current run).

It really isn’t meant to be any deeper than that.  It’s not relevant what other teams have done.  It’s not meant to be sophisticated, it doesn’t take strength of fixture, starting point, etc, it’s a simple notion that 3 points from 6 is not very good and would lead to relegation if was persisted games 1-46, and 13 from 6 is very good would lead to promotion on the same basis.

[Superjack]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

OMG, what a thread.

The very simple point, it’s relevant to Bristol City ONLY, is that in a batch of games for Bristol City ONLY the number of points gained can show that if extrapolated across the 46 game season would lead to relegation (or promotion on current run).

It really isn’t meant to be any deeper than that.  It’s not relevant what other teams have done.  It’s not meant to be sophisticated, it doesn’t take strength of fixture, starting point, etc, it’s a simple notion that 3 points from 6 is not very good and would lead to relegation if was persisted games 1-46, and 13 from 6 is very good would lead to promotion on the same basis.

Educating pork, mate.

[Silvio Dante]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

OMG, what a thread.

The very simple point, it’s relevant to Bristol City ONLY, is that in a batch of games for Bristol City ONLY the number of points gained can show that if extrapolated across the 46 game season would lead to relegation (or promotion on current run).

It really isn’t meant to be any deeper than that.  It’s not relevant what other teams have done.  It’s not meant to be sophisticated, it doesn’t take strength of fixture, starting point, etc, it’s a simple notion that 3 points from 6 is not very good and would lead to relegation if was persisted games 1-46, and 13 from 6 is very good would lead to promotion on the same basis.

Dont blame me Dave, all I said was that 3 points from 6 games was relegation form, I didn’t expect to get into an episode of 3-2-1!

Edited April 11 by Silvio Dante

[Davefevs]

13 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Dont blame me Dave, all I said was that 3 points from 6 games was relegation form, I didn’t expect to get into an episode of 3-2-1!

Halibut and Jehovah reactions!

[TV Tom]

22 minutes ago, Superjack said:

Educating pork, mate.

You really are quite rude aren’t you

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

2 hours ago, transfer reader said:

No, you're missing what I said 

 

Our form is top 2 form because it's literally top 2 in the form table.

If it was bottom 3 of the form table it would be relegation form.

That's been my point from the start.

You're adding in ppg, form is always relative to the performances of other teams, but you're ignoring that.

 

Even in those quotes where you've claimed I'm arguing with myself you've ******* misread.

There's literally no more ways for me to state this, I don't know why you're struggling with reading so much.

 

For those struggling to understand, below the red line = relegation form.

 

Yeah when you win the last 6 games of the season and get relegated because you averages 0.6 PPG for the preceding 38 games.  I expect you to suitably outraged.  People have been rightly concerned that until recently our form has been awful proper shit, 0.85 ppg from Christmas until Easter left a lot of fans with a very bitter taste.  A few wins barely changes the fact our form since Christmas puts us in a bad place next year if it were to carry over.

[transfer reader]

Just now, Lorenzos Only Goal said:

Yeah when you win the last 6 games of the season and get relegated because you averages 0.6 PPG for the preceding 38 games.  I expect you to suitably outraged.  People have been rightly concerned that until recently our form has been awful proper shit, 0.85 ppg from Christmas until Easter left a lot of fans with a very bitter taste.  A few wins barely changes the fact our form since Christmas puts us in a bad place next year if it were to carry over.

I'm not the one making and drawing conclusions, just making a point about misuse of the stats.

Not sure why the team in your scenario doesn't get a full season though.

 

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

3 minutes ago, transfer reader said:

I'm not the one making and drawing conclusions, just making a point about misuse of the stats.

Not sure why the team in your scenario doesn't get a full season though.

 

The truth is, bookies build form tables on 6 results be made there is a large error margin baked in, and people get suckered in and they make money.  The truth is this is called a "hot hand fallacy" and invariably is more psychology than statistics.

https://medium.com/@deepgreenanalytics/the-illusion-of-form-an-empirical-analysis-of-the-premier-league-930299eaa92a

[transfer reader]

13 minutes ago, Lorenzos Only Goal said:

The truth is, bookies build form tables on 6 results be made there is a large error margin baked in, and people get suckered in and they make money.  The truth is this is called a "hot hand fallacy" and invariably is more psychology than statistics.

https://medium.com/@deepgreenanalytics/the-illusion-of-form-an-empirical-analysis-of-the-premier-league-930299eaa92a

Again, tell that to the people making claims about when we were in 'relegation form'

I was correcting fallacious conclusions being made.