Bizarro Land

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

I can't remember a season when so many teams were around 500 at the same time...only a couple bottom feeders this season
 
Orlando looks for real and there is no situation in which they'd want to give up Simmons and Fournier for Mo Harkless back. I know they get picks but it ain't gonna happen. Do you really think Orlando isn't a playoff team? It's not like their wins are close games against crappy teams. They are blowing out good teams on the road. The one game sample size of their loss to Chicago doesn't mean they should be looking to blow it up.
Dude... LMAO.

I bet you they're at least 8 games under .500 at the all-star break. It's funny that you say "The one game sample size is two small", yet formulate opinions with a ridiculous level of certainty based of 4-game, 6-game, 8-game sample sizes.

So when a team at the start of the season overperforms and beats a couple of good teams, you get extremely carried away. Suns "hottest team in the league" as well as "the best team if they hadn't played us". Orlando is now "for real" and a "playoff team". You get sooo carried away with small sample sizes. Smaller sample size means more standard deviation, means less accurate results (in the case, a less accurate record).
Researchers and scientists conducting surveys and performing experiments must adhere to certain procedural guidelines and rules in order to insure accuracy by avoiding sampling errors such as large variability, bias or undercoverage. Sampling errors can significantly affect the precision and interpretation of the results, which can in turn lead to high costs for businesses or government agencies.

DISADVANTAGE 1: VARIABILITY
Variability is determined by the standard deviation of the population; the standard deviation of a sample is how the far the true results of the survey are from the results of the sample that you collected. You want to survey as large a sample size as possible; the larger the standard deviation, the less accurate your results will be, since smaller sample sizes get increasingly further away from the entire population.
Quit getting carried away with small sample sizes. It's ridiculous.
 
Dude... LMAO.

I bet you they're at least 8 games under .500 at the all-star break. It's funny that you say "The one game sample size is two small", yet formulate opinions with a ridiculous level of certainty based of 4-game, 6-game, 8-game sample sizes.

So when a team at the start of the season overperforms and beats a couple of good teams, you get extremely carried away. Suns "hottest team in the league" as well as "the best team if they hadn't played us". Orlando is now "for real" and a "playoff team". You get sooo carried away with small sample sizes. Smaller sample size means more standard deviation, means less accurate results (in the case, a less accurate record).

Quit getting carried away with small sample sizes. It's ridiculous.
Keep pushing that rock.
 
Dude... LMAO.

I bet you they're at least 8 games under .500 at the all-star break. It's funny that you say "The one game sample size is two small", yet formulate opinions with a ridiculous level of certainty based of 4-game, 6-game, 8-game sample sizes.

So when a team at the start of the season overperforms and beats a couple of good teams, you get extremely carried away. Suns "hottest team in the league" as well as "the best team if they hadn't played us". Orlando is now "for real" and a "playoff team". You get sooo carried away with small sample sizes. Smaller sample size means more standard deviation, means less accurate results (in the case, a less accurate record).

Quit getting carried away with small sample sizes. It's ridiculous.
His boyfriend has been getting carried away with his small sample size for years! #BAM
Too bad he won't see this.
 
Dude... LMAO.

I bet you they're at least 8 games under .500 at the all-star break. It's funny that you say "The one game sample size is two small", yet formulate opinions with a ridiculous level of certainty based of 4-game, 6-game, 8-game sample sizes.

So when a team at the start of the season overperforms and beats a couple of good teams, you get extremely carried away. Suns "hottest team in the league" as well as "the best team if they hadn't played us". Orlando is now "for real" and a "playoff team". You get sooo carried away with small sample sizes. Smaller sample size means more standard deviation, means less accurate results (in the case, a less accurate record).

Quit getting carried away with small sample sizes. It's ridiculous.

Okay. I take that bet. $100. Easy money.



In something like this, schedules matter.
Be informed.

http://www.espn.com/nba/team/schedule/_/name/orl/orlando-magic
 
In something like this, schedules matter.
As do definitions, for although it seems obvious to me, there are some who take an altered definition of the term "games under .500", looking at the past instead of at the future. At the all star break, ORL will have played 57 games, so the threshold here should over/under 24.5 wins (24-33 being 9 games under .500).

I would hate for this to be agreed to, for the Magic to be 24-33, and for KS to then say, "If they had won 5 of the games they've lost they'd be over .500; therefore they're only 4.5 games below .500 right now, and I win." I've seen this argument elsewhere before and suggest it be avoided in advance.
 
So far only visiting teams have won today. And one of them was Atlanta!

(Utah going to spoil that soon, though.)
 
As do definitions, for although it seems obvious to me, there are some who take an altered definition of the term "games under .500", looking at the past instead of at the future. At the all star break, ORL will have played 57 games, so the threshold here should over/under 24.5 wins (24-33 being 9 games under .500).

I would hate for this to be agreed to, for the Magic to be 24-33, and for KS to then say, "If they had won 5 of the games they've lost they'd be over .500; therefore they're only 4.5 games below .500 right now, and I win." I've seen this argument elsewhere before and suggest it be avoided in advance.
24-33. If Magic do that or worse, I get $100. But now BJ is backing off. He PMed me and said he wants to make it 4 games, lol.
 
Dude. I have a life. I don't spend all day checking my PMs.
You had enough time to place a bet in this thread as well as PM me about it in the 1st place. Figured you'd have enough time to respond to the PM that you started.
 
Something tells me this is not gonna end well? There was another time and place when someone who shall remain nameless owed another who shall remain nameless money. This did not end well.
There are other sites that i frequent that money and betting come into play. I personally was involved in a bet where the loser simply did not pay.
Betting with other contributors on a fan forum is really not a good idea.
 
Something tells me this is not gonna end well? There was another time and place when someone who shall remain nameless owed another who shall remain nameless money. This did not end well.
There are other sites that i frequent that money and betting come into play. I personally was involved in a bet where the loser simply did not pay.
Betting with other contributors on a fan forum is really not a good idea.

lol yeah. I played a fantasy basketball league with a $50 entry - I didn't even want in it and the guy paid my entry fee.... I ended up winning the damn thing for like $400, and I even told him to take the $50 out and to just pay me the $350.

Never did. LOL.
 
Something tells me this is not gonna end well? There was another time and place when someone who shall remain nameless owed another who shall remain nameless money. This did not end well.
There are other sites that i frequent that money and betting come into play. I personally was involved in a bet where the loser simply did not pay.
Betting with other contributors on a fan forum is really not a good idea.

If you make a bet and you lose, pay up. I lost and I paid.
 
I still feel like I stole CC's lunch money on that one.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top