Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

UW Doog Bot's Proprietary Season Wins Probability Distribution Calculator® Way Too Early Prediction

UW_Doog_BotUW_Doog_Bot Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 15,824 Swaye's Wigwam
Since I guess we are all putting our Ballz out there early with @YellowSnow & @puppylove_sugarsteel because Off Season = Best Season and since I already did some calculating anyways I decided to just pull em' out for all you guys to see.



Just a reminder of last year's accuracy.



Though given, that was post Auburn loss before which, we'd had slightly better odds of going 10-2. Fuck off, and generate your own proprietary calculator that's better.

For a methodology refresher and for Kim's benefit when he plagiarizes this, I split games into the following 7 categories and assign them a statistical percentage likelihood based on some math stuff.
  • No Way We? Win - 1%
  • Highly Unlikely To Win - 16%
  • Unlikely To Win - 32%
  • 50/50 To Win - 50%
  • Likely To Win - 68%
  • Highly Likely To Win - 84%
  • No Way We? Don't Win - 99%


These are the values I assigned to each game.
  • EWU - No Way We? Don't Win - 99%
  • Cal - Likely To Win - 68%
  • Hawaii - No Way We? Don't Win - 99%
  • @BYU - Highly Likely To Win - 84%
  • USC - Likely To Win - 68%
  • @Stanford - Likely To Win - 68%
  • @Arizona - Likely To Win - 68%
  • Oregon - Highly Likely To Win - 84%
  • BYE - L
  • Utah - Likely To Win - 68%
  • @OSU - No Way We? Don't Win - 99%
  • BYE - L
  • @Colorado - No Way We? Don't Win - 99%
  • WSU - Highly Likely To Win - 84%


You might think that the values for say, @Stanford and @Arizona, are different and should be something like 62% and 74% respectively, the point of the methodology isn't to predict the outcome of a specific game but to generate a per game average win % to apply to the whole season for a Win-Loss expected value. For this reason, we can avoid trying to nail down individual % too accurately and assume that across the sample the differences will balance themselves out[(62+74)/2=68]. If you don't get it, just trust me, math.



The TLDR results, Expected Value = 9.88 so we can roughly assume that 10-2 is the most probable regular season outcome.

After assigning our % values we average them out and come up with a 82% average chance of winning each game.

"But Doogie, why do I care what our average is? Doesn't that ignore individual matchups?"

Sure it does, but we aren't predicting one game, or the specific outcomes of any games, we want to figure out what our end of season record is likely to be and an average % will do that accurately enough for our purposes. Even though we might be favored in every game across the whole season we are likely to lose a few games. (This is why undefeated seasons are so fucking special)

So we take that average % and apply it to a binomial distribution and we get this.



So WTF does that mean? Well, it means that 10-2 is indeed the most likely outcome at almost 30%. 11-1 at 25% and 9-3 at 21% being the other most likely outcomes.

"Bot, our schedule is shit and you are telling me that 9-3 is almost as likely as a better record?"



Well, it is and it isn't, if you look at individual outcomes it is a likely outcome BUT if you look at an aggregate of above/below our expected value (9.88) we get a likelihood of winning 10 or more games of 64% and winning 9 or less games of 35%. In other words, take the over, 10-2 or better.

This also means that 9 wins should be viewed as a "floor" of sorts. Less than that and the team is probably under-performing its talent in a consistent manner that is attributable to coaching/development/etc. In other words, we should be talking about who is losing their job.



Later, closer to the season, I will do my regular polling of the masses and update the maff with HH's aggregate prediction. So you will get your chance to make your own predictions with this approach. Who knows, maybe I will feel generous and even do a Duck version for the Refuge since @greenblood is kind of cool and we have a bunch of retard educk poasters seeking asylum and flooding the place with their AIDS over there.

Math gifs




«13

Comments

  • BennyBeaverBennyBeaver Member Posts: 13,346
    I could have told you 10-2 without any maff.
  • CFetters_Nacho_LoverCFetters_Nacho_Lover Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 30,379 Founders Club
  • PostGameOrangeSlicesPostGameOrangeSlices Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 26,151 Swaye's Wigwam

    10-2 is a disappointment quite honestly

    I can accept one loss because going unbeaten is rare for anyone let alone us but 2 losses with this schedule is bad

    This
  • UW_Doog_BotUW_Doog_Bot Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 15,824 Swaye's Wigwam

    10-2 is a disappointment quite honestly

    I can accept one loss because going unbeaten is rare for anyone let alone us but 2 losses with this schedule is bad

    85% is all it would take to make 11-1 the most likely outcome. The difference is pretty minuscule but played out over an entire season it is important. What games would you adjust upward to get the additional 3% average? USC? @Arizona? @Stanford?
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 105,955 Founders Club

    10-2 is a disappointment quite honestly

    I can accept one loss because going unbeaten is rare for anyone let alone us but 2 losses with this schedule is bad

    85% is all it would take to make 11-1 the most likely outcome. The difference is pretty minuscule but played out over an entire season it is important. What games would you adjust upward to get the additional 3% average? USC? @Arizona? @Stanford?
    I don't do math
  • UW_Doog_BotUW_Doog_Bot Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 15,824 Swaye's Wigwam

    10-2 is a disappointment quite honestly

    I can accept one loss because going unbeaten is rare for anyone let alone us but 2 losses with this schedule is bad

    85% is all it would take to make 11-1 the most likely outcome. The difference is pretty minuscule but played out over an entire season it is important. What games would you adjust upward to get the additional 3% average? USC? @Arizona? @Stanford?
    I don't do math
    Doesn't require math, just picking a few teams to move from "likely to win" to "highly likely to win" or to "No way we? lose". I'll do the math.

    Answer the question @RaceBannon!!
  • YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 35,435 Founders Club
    I will be somewhat disappointed with 10-2, but a lot of that depends on who the losses are two and how the games play out. And whether we win the North and the league or not.

    9-3 and it's FirePete.com
  • DooglesDoogles Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 12,591 Founders Club
    Love you for this, but I would probably adjust the Stanford game to a 50-50 and bring Colorado down to a highly likely.

    We haven't won @Stanford forever and it's played after USC so the guys might be banged up.

    @Colorado on their senior night with their forever Senior QB. New Coach so who knows, but UW will get their best shot at altitude. We win, highly likely, but there is definitely a way we lose.
  • UW_Doog_BotUW_Doog_Bot Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 15,824 Swaye's Wigwam
    Doogles said:

    Love you for this, but I would probably adjust the Stanford game to a 50-50 and bring Colorado down to a highly likely.

    We haven't won @Stanford forever and it's played after USC so the guys might be banged up.

    @Colorado on their senior night with their forever Senior QB. New Coach so who knows, but UW will get their best shot at altitude. We win, highly likely, but there is definitely a way we lose.

    That's the thing, move a few up, move a few down, moar or less it all balances out. The aggregate HH scores were pretty spot on last year and I'll be polling for those again later. We were a few lucky bounces/calls from 10-2. I'm sure even if we aren't 10-2 it'll be similar in that a few lucky(or unlucky) moments make the difference.

    This is also a separate conversation for what expectations for a coach SHOULD BE.
  • YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 35,435 Founders Club

    The bottom pic made me think of what is, rather easily, the greatest non-naked jugs scene in the history of cinema.



    Taking it off here boss!!
  • DerekJohnsonDerekJohnson Administrator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 63,510 Founders Club

    Did we have a Newman poll? Cool Hand Luke is hard to top as the GOAT for Newman

    Its where I learned to keep getting back up and EARN some prison respect

    The Verdict was amazing acting
  • UW_Doog_BotUW_Doog_Bot Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 15,824 Swaye's Wigwam
    Doogles said:

    Love you for this, but I would probably adjust the Stanford game to a 50-50 and bring Colorado down to a highly likely.

    We haven't won @Stanford forever and it's played after USC so the guys might be banged up.

    @Colorado on their senior night with their forever Senior QB. New Coach so who knows, but UW will get their best shot at altitude. We win, highly likely, but there is definitely a way we lose.

    With those numbers EV turns into 9.55, still just good enough to make 10-2 the most likely but the distribution significantly shifts to this.



    Which means slightly better than coin toss P(x)>9
Sign In or Register to comment.