Discuss.
How many more seasons do you think the Phoenix will last?
36 replies
·
1,521 views
Locked
That graph would make more sense if you reversed the league position series, because then you could more easily see the relativity between position and attendance, and the decline in our fortunes I think you are trying to illustrate.
Permalink
Permalink
Yeah the graph is shit. Sort it out.
Three for me, and two for them.
Permalink
Permalink
Stupid thread.
If you are old and wise you were probably young and stupid
Permalink
Permalink
Stupid thread.
Thank you for your valuable contribution to said thread.
Permalink
Permalink
[quote=Leggy]
Stupid thread.
Thank you for your valuable contribution to said thread.
[/quote\You are welcome.
If you are old and wise you were probably young and stupid
Permalink
Permalink
I did give serious consideration to that but thought it would be too confusing for you plebs.
For clarification, in this chart a HIGHER league position means we have performed relatively POORER.
Well, sorry but I think you failed, it's more confusing as it is.
So I think the real question is "how many more posts do you think this thread will last"
Permalink
Permalink
Maybe that is a bit harsh, but after years supporting the Kingz, Knightz, All whites, Phoenix, NZ cricket team, I have finally snapped.
Permalink
Permalink
Maybe that is a bit harsh, but after years supporting the Kingz, Knightz, All whites, Phoenix, NZ cricket team, I have finally snapped.
Yeah but can you stop bumping this thread?
Permalink
Permalink
Maybe that is a bit harsh, but after years supporting the Kingz, Knightz, All whites, Phoenix, NZ cricket team, I have finally snapped.
Yeah but can you stop bumping this thread?
You just bumped it.
Permalink
Permalink
Maybe that is a bit harsh, but after years supporting the Kingz, Knightz, All whites, Phoenix, NZ cricket team, I have finally snapped.
Yeah but can you stop bumping this thread?
You just bumped it.
You got me confused with someone else.
Permalink
Permalink
Graphs should make data easier to interpret in a visual format. That graph fails at that, it's impossible to see any correlation between position and results.
Yellow Fever - Misery loves company
Permalink
Permalink
Until the A-League implements a second teir and promotion/relegation?
Permalink
Permalink
Here's a much better version. The blue line is the average attendance for that season. The green bar is the number of position from the bottom of the table that the Phoenix placed (e.g. last season is 1 as we came bottom, whereas 09/10 is 7). The yellow bar is the same as the green bar, but it uses the average attendance table for that season, rather than the results table, in order to provide some context to our average attendance for that season.
Yellow Fever - Misery loves company
Permalink
Permalink
Here's a much better version. The blue line is the average attendance for that season. The green bar is the number of position from the bottom of the table that the Phoenix placed (e.g. last season is 1 as we came bottom, whereas 09/10 is 7). The yellow bar is the same as the green bar, but it uses the average attendance table for that season, rather than the results table, in order to provide some context to our average attendance for that season.
And that's why we love Patrick, (possibly in a Peter Griffin voice).
Permalink
Permalink
I wasn't going to post on this stupid thread, but am moved to comment on your graph Patrick:
- Clearly labelled axes and appropriate title
- Good use of bar for discrete units and line for continuous variables
- Appropriate scales for both sets of variables
My only slight niggle is that the two "position" categories might be better split into two graphs when comparing with crowd numbers, but otherwise a very good effort.
A
(not far off an A+)
"Phoenix till they lose"
Posting 97% bollox, 8% lies and 3.658% genuine opinion.
Genuine opinion: FTFFA
Permalink
Permalink
I just calculated the correlation coefficient for the relationship between position in the league (using my reversed data as above) against the average attendance in the league, and it came out as -0.105238934. This indicated that there is a weak, negative relationship between the two data sets.
First of all, as the coefficient is very close to 0, there is a weak relationship between the two datasets (a value of 1 or -1 would be a very very strong relationship, whereas 0 would be no relationship at all).
Secondly, there is a negative relationship between the two. This is bizarre, as we would expect there to be a positive relationship (which would mean as we get further away from the bottom of the table, we would see the attendances get higher too). However, the correlation is actually negative, which means that as we get further away from the bottom of the table, attendances go down. However, we shouldn't read too much into this negative relationship, since the relationship is very weak. (In fact, the cause of this is season one, where we came last but had our best ever attendances).
Note: I removed all playoff attendances for both the table and the correlation.
Yellow Fever - Misery loves company
Permalink
Permalink
Wow is it off season already cause everyone posting in this thread is acting like it is .
I LOVE LAMP
Permalink
Permalink
I just calculated the correlation coefficient for the relationship between position in the league (using my reversed data as above) against the average attendance in the league, and it came out as -0.105238934. This indicated that there is a weak, negative relationship between the two data sets.
First of all, as the coefficient is very close to 0, there is a weak relationship between the two datasets (a value of 1 or -1 would be a very very strong relationship, whereas 0 would be no relationship at all).
Secondly, there is a negative relationship between the two. This is bizarre, as we would expect there to be a positive relationship (which would mean as we get further away from the bottom of the table, we would see the attendances get higher too). However, the correlation is actually negative, which means that as we get further away from the bottom of the table, attendances go down. However, we shouldn't read too much into this negative relationship, since the relationship is very weak. (In fact, the cause of this is season one, where we came last but had our best ever attendances).
Note: I removed all playoff attendances for both the table and the correlation.
Top marks young man.
Have an A+.
Everyone else can use this as a model answer and will need to complete Exercises 3 a, b, c, 4 (all sections), 7 a and b only.
IBTL
"Phoenix till they lose"
Posting 97% bollox, 8% lies and 3.658% genuine opinion.
Genuine opinion: FTFFA
Permalink
Permalink
Top marks young man.
Have an A+.
Everyone else can use this as a model answer and will need to complete Exercises 3 a, b, c, 4 (all sections), 7 a and b only.
IBTL
Do I get a special prize? I'd settle for one of these bad boys:
Yellow Fever - Misery loves company
Permalink
Permalink
No. As a YF member you GET to create clever graphs and undertake statistical analysis of spurious data based on a shaky hypothesis and disprove said hypothesis.
Isn't that enough?
(plus there is no PM function so I can't give you a special prize anyway)
"Phoenix till they lose"
Posting 97% bollox, 8% lies and 3.658% genuine opinion.
Genuine opinion: FTFFA
Permalink
Permalink
1 in 10000 means nothing when you are the 1
Supporter For Ever - Keep The Faith - Foundation Member - Never Lets FAX Get In The Way Of A Good Yarn
Permalink
Permalink
Stats say what you want them to say - the result of the stat only becomes relative when you cannot get a positive from it. We all have been on the wrong end of a statistic at some point. You just make the best of it.
1 in 10000 means nothing when you are the 1
"Phoenix till they lose"
Posting 97% bollox, 8% lies and 3.658% genuine opinion.
Genuine opinion: FTFFA
Permalink
Permalink
I just calculated the correlation coefficient for the relationship between position in the league (using my reversed data as above) against the average attendance in the league, and it came out as -0.105238934. This indicated that there is a weak, negative relationship between the two data sets.
First of all, as the coefficient is very close to 0, there is a weak relationship between the two datasets (a value of 1 or -1 would be a very very strong relationship, whereas 0 would be no relationship at all).
Secondly, there is a negative relationship between the two. This is bizarre, as we would expect there to be a positive relationship (which would mean as we get further away from the bottom of the table, we would see the attendances get higher too). However, the correlation is actually negative, which means that as we get further away from the bottom of the table, attendances go down. However, we shouldn't read too much into this negative relationship, since the relationship is very weak. (In fact, the cause of this is season one, where we came last but had our best ever attendances).
Note: I removed all playoff attendances for both the table and the correlation.
What would happen to that if you removed the first season which is likely an outlier due to the enthusiasm around the new side in town - I wonder if that is throwing off the numbers?
Permalink
Permalink
Visually you would probably get very little correlation as well. But go ahead and try it.
This is what I like to see - lots of what if questions (shows an interest in understanding the original hypothesis).
#scienceisnotquitedeadyet
"Phoenix till they lose"
Posting 97% bollox, 8% lies and 3.658% genuine opinion.
Genuine opinion: FTFFA
Permalink
Permalink
I did give serious consideration to that but thought it would be too confusing for you plebs.
For clarification, in this chart a HIGHER league position means we have performed relatively POORER.
Well, sorry but I think you failed, it's more confusing as it is.
So I think the real question is "how many more posts do you think this thread will last"
Over 20, including your very own right above this.
Thank you Patrick, I enjoyed that post. Interested to see what happens if you take aitkenmike's feedback on board.
Permalink
Permalink
I just calculated the correlation coefficient for the relationship between position in the league (using my reversed data as above) against the average attendance in the league, and it came out as -0.105238934. This indicated that there is a weak, negative relationship between the two data sets.
First of all, as the coefficient is very close to 0, there is a weak relationship between the two datasets (a value of 1 or -1 would be a very very strong relationship, whereas 0 would be no relationship at all).
Secondly, there is a negative relationship between the two. This is bizarre, as we would expect there to be a positive relationship (which would mean as we get further away from the bottom of the table, we would see the attendances get higher too). However, the correlation is actually negative, which means that as we get further away from the bottom of the table, attendances go down. However, we shouldn't read too much into this negative relationship, since the relationship is very weak. (In fact, the cause of this is season one, where we came last but had our best ever attendances).
Note: I removed all playoff attendances for both the table and the correlation.
What would happen to that if you removed the first season which is likely an outlier due to the enthusiasm around the new side in town - I wonder if that is throwing off the numbers?
I'd say very weak positive. Which is about what I'd personally have expected.
Which goes to show, the club needs to work on building its core fan base, rather than relying on casuals to turn up when we are winning. There are many things that can help them achieve this, but the one I've been most vocal on is not taking games away for a quick buck and leaving locals without a proper game for the first 2 months of the season.
Allegedly
Permalink
Permalink
I did give serious consideration to that but thought it would be too confusing for you plebs.
For clarification, in this chart a HIGHER league position means we have performed relatively POORER.
Well, sorry but I think you failed, it's more confusing as it is.
So I think the real question is "how many more posts do you think this thread will last"
Over 20, including your very own right above this.
Thank you Patrick, I enjoyed that post. Interested to see what happens if you take aitkenmike's feedback on board.
Triple fuck this stupid thread.
"Phoenix till they lose"
Posting 97% bollox, 8% lies and 3.658% genuine opinion.
Genuine opinion: FTFFA
Permalink
Permalink
I did give serious consideration to that but thought it would be too confusing for you plebs.
For clarification, in this chart a HIGHER league position means we have performed relatively POORER.
Well, sorry but I think you failed, it's more confusing as it is.
So I think the real question is "how many more posts do you think this thread will last"
Over 20, including your very own right above this.
Thank you Patrick, I enjoyed that post. Interested to see what happens if you take aitkenmike's feedback on board.
Triple fuck this stupid thread.
Grumpy old bastard alert
Permalink
Permalink
I did give serious consideration to that but thought it would be too confusing for you plebs.
For clarification, in this chart a HIGHER league position means we have performed relatively POORER.
Well, sorry but I think you failed, it's more confusing as it is.
So I think the real question is "how many more posts do you think this thread will last"
Over 20, including your very own right above this.
Thank you Patrick, I enjoyed that post. Interested to see what happens if you take aitkenmike's feedback on board.
Triple fuck this stupid thread.
I LOVE LAMP
Permalink
Permalink
This topic is locked.