You'll have to excuse me for not being impressed by your posse of zero....
Kirk was on 670 The Score here in Chicago today
- Thread starter LaQuintaHawkeye
- Start date
You'll have to excuse me for not being impressed by your posse of zero....
For those of you not capable of doing math. .604 of 12 is 7.24. Dude is a 7 win coach.
Glad he's averaged closer to 8 wins than 7 during his career at Iowa though. It's also comforting to know that his regular season win percentage is closer to an 8-5 coach than a 7-5.
Well dont stop there short stop he is closer yet to 15/25 and both are equally as relevant.
Again 8-5 is not an option when the denominator is 12.
You are special.
Again 8-5 is not an option when the denominator is 12.
You are special.
Did it. Turns out I still think you're just a blowhard little b*tch.
Yawn. Your the type of beta that doesnt even answer a direct question. The best thing you have come up with is "your wrong". Must be pretty comfortable calling someone a b* from behind a keyboard.
P.s. try again.
From behind that keyboard. I know. Beta.
What you dont seem comfortable doing is math or providing facts.
What you dont seem comfortable doing is math or providing facts.
Sure its. 1 youralittleB1tchwhochallengedafightknowingyouwerenotgoingtoshowup way.
It's right off of
ibetyourmomstillpaysyourfvckingbills blvd.
across the street from yourafvckingc0ward parkway.
Let me know when your in IC or DM we can figure it out from there.
It's right off of
ibetyourmomstillpaysyourfvckingbills blvd.
across the street from yourafvckingc0ward parkway.
Let me know when your in IC or DM we can figure it out from there.
there is no coming back from that one beta boy. There isnt enough FIFY in the world for you to try to claim a sack.
Wait, your not a chick are you?
Your challenge a fight from 2k miles away is very chick like. If so I bought it. I thought you were just a beta but you could actually be a tough thinking female.
Your challenge a fight from 2k miles away is very chick like. If so I bought it. I thought you were just a beta but you could actually be a tough thinking female.
Dumbass, I never challenged you to a fight. You suggested that I was hiding behind a keyboard and I simply let you know that I'd keep my eye out for you while at games. You took it from there.
O yeah? Feel like you might be able to Express your ideas better in person? Dont back track you said your words at least hold them. This is a message board we dont have to agree. First you called me a hater, and I didnt care. Then after "bullshit" "blowhard" (which is just fing odd btw)and "dipshit" you called me a "b*tch". If you ever find yourself in the state of iowa, let me know. I will surely allow you to try to Express your opinion.
O yeah? Feel like you might be able to Express your ideas better in person? Dont back track you said your words at least hold them. This is a message board we dont have to agree. First you called me a hater, and I didnt care. Then after "bullshit" "blowhard" (which is just fing odd btw)and "dipshit" you called me a "b*tch". If you ever find yourself in the state of iowa, let me know. I will surely allow you to try to Express your opinion.
Let's review......I said bullsh*t after you falsely accused me of starting a thread about you.
I called you a blowhard and a dipshit AFTER you referred to me as a dunce and questioned my intelligence repeatedly .
I called you a Bitch AFTER you suggested I hit myself in the head with a hammer.
See how that works?
"bloodredd, post: 5370984, member: 73014"]Let's review......I said bullsh*t after you falsely accused me of starting a thread about you."
(False That was a question )
See how that works?
Here is said question:
"Wasnt-drunk-didnt-troll, post: 5367956, member: 88956"]You love labels. I'm not a hater, its data. Arnt you the dude that created a thread trying to call me out and got told to F off?[/QUOTE]
"I called you a blowhard and a dipshit AFTER you referred to me as a dunce"
(man that must have been tough after you had already tried Hater and accused me of "bullshit" AKA lying)
"and questioned my intelligence repeatedly"
( the irony of this is I tried helping you and you accused me of being mentally challenged) .
I called you a Bitch AFTER you suggested I hit myself in the head with a hammer. (Let me know maybe like a cafe or maybe a bar for a beer?)
Direct qoutes:
[QUOTE"Wasnt-drunk-didnt-troll, post: 5367956, member: 88956"]You love labels. I'm not a hater, its data. Arnt you the dude that created a thread trying to call me out and got told to F off?[/QUOTE]
The best part is at the end of the day your still wrong about the math.
(False That was a question )
See how that works?
Here is said question:
"Wasnt-drunk-didnt-troll, post: 5367956, member: 88956"]You love labels. I'm not a hater, its data. Arnt you the dude that created a thread trying to call me out and got told to F off?[/QUOTE]
"I called you a blowhard and a dipshit AFTER you referred to me as a dunce"
(man that must have been tough after you had already tried Hater and accused me of "bullshit" AKA lying)
"and questioned my intelligence repeatedly"
( the irony of this is I tried helping you and you accused me of being mentally challenged) .
I called you a Bitch AFTER you suggested I hit myself in the head with a hammer. (Let me know maybe like a cafe or maybe a bar for a beer?)
Direct qoutes:
[QUOTE"Wasnt-drunk-didnt-troll, post: 5367956, member: 88956"]You love labels. I'm not a hater, its data. Arnt you the dude that created a thread trying to call me out and got told to F off?[/QUOTE]
The best part is at the end of the day your still wrong about the math.
Last edited:
I thought Homer's data showed somewhere between 7 & 9 wins. That sure sounds a lot like 8 to me.
He is likely to get to 8 wins when he plays the 13th game. Homer brought up 9 because he is more likely to get to 9, in a 13 game schedule than he is 6(I'm assuming you can put together the reason 6 is so unlikely is we would have to go 6-6 to make the 13th game and lose.. But in a normal 12 game schedule, He is likely to win 7 games.
I'm sorry I cannot make it cleaner but the information is at the very bottom.
Wasnt-drunk-didnt-trollHR All-American
↑
There IS such thing as good data versus bad data. If data is collected in an exceedingly careful fashion and it is meticulously annotated ... then YES, it would be a mistake to disregard such data out of hand. In fact, many interesting results in science have resulted from coming up with new models to accounted for such "interesting" (and seemingly anomalous) data points.
On the flip side, if data is taken in a relatively more haphazard fashion and is poorly annotated - then such data can actually lead to incorrect conclusions and screw up results. For example, in micro-biology, when doing careful phylogenetic analysis .... skilled bioinformaticians usually have to exclude Craig Venter's big data dumps because they're so poorly annotated. If you're unfamiliar with Venter - he's the same guy who wanted to patent the human genome (thankfully public entities "beat him" ... and were able to block his attempts). However, later in life, he rode around the ocean shotgun sequencing the crap out of samples from the ocean. However, there are all sorts of problem with his data ... like the quality of filters he was using (it's likely that his data also includes genomes of giant viruses - but you wouldn't know it from his data). He was of the opinion that the more data he could get - the better. Unfortunately, so much of his data was acquired in a sloppy fashion and wasn't properly annotated ... that it's still not yet clear if his data dumps did more harm than good.
Click to expand...
Valid. I stand corrected. However in our scenario here "bad data" would come from (example: win loss percentage while coaching at a previous university or while not the head coach) would you agree removing any of the data collected while KF has been the HC of iowa would discredit the data set?
I should have been ahead of this. I once conducted a study on the impact of college athletes 40 times in relation to sunlight. I had to throw out the data collected around midday as many of my participants had a full belly from lunch.
281 Monday at 6:52 PM
Last edited: Monday at 6:58 PM
LaQuintaHawkeyeAll-Conference
Kirk has a solid 8-5 tenure going, it’s all good.
282 Monday at 7:13 PM
RogerKint likes this.
Hwk-I-St8HR Heisman
↑
The data needs to be included in order to show reliable data. If you want to say looking at the most recent 5 years is more valid than his entire body ofnwoek you might have a stance but your sacrificing reliability for validity ar the point. Having all the data included makes the information more reliable if you want to say it's worth the reliability for what you feel is more validity. Your case study would be crushed by anyone with a working knowledge of stats.
So you're saying the first few seasons weren't relevant after the 02 (4th ) season, but they are now. Got it.
283 Monday at 7:50 PM
Wasnt-drunk-didnt-trollHR All-American
↑
So you're saying the first few seasons weren't relevant after the 02 (4th ) season, but they are now. Got it.
I dont think you do but ok.
284 Monday at 7:52 PM
bloodreddTeam MVP
↑
He averages 7.5 wins and 5.1 losses a year without the bowls included.
Wrong. Those numbers include his bowls. they are 7.53 and 5.11
↑
If you average 7.5 wins and 5.1 losses during the regular season and you play an average of 12 games a during a regular season
You can't average 7.53 wins and 5.11 losses by averaging 12 games. We have not averaged 12 games.
↑
Except he isnt closer to 8 than he is 7.
Yes, he is. This is clear to almost everyone
↑
You dont get to round and then accuse someone of skewing data
His average win number is 7.53. You are the one attempting to round it down to 7. This is important in figuring out why people don't agree with you
↑
Show me how you get to 8 without rounding.
No one in this thread has ever said they are not rounding when they say he is closer to 8 wins than 7.
↑
A coach averages 7.5 wins and 5.1 losses for every 12 games played. If that coach plays 12 games how many wins does he have?
No one will answer this question because it proves absolutely nothing. It provides no valid information, and is nothing more than speculation and diversion.
↑
The bowl results actually hurt his numbers.
Again, the bowl results are included in his 143-97 record, or 7.53 wins per year.
↑
I'm not a KF hater but some of the stances the KF Homer's take are just asinine.
lol
↑
It's easier just to say he is a 7-5 regular season coach.
for a hater......
↑
He is 7-8 in the bowls of I really wanted to slam on that I would use the numbers.
again, the bowls are included. I made the mistake of taking you at your word at first, but then I looked it up. You've been yacking about this incessantly and you've been giving us bad info the whole time.
↑
You cannot remove data and claim the numbers are valid.
True. Stop rounding down to 7
↑
7.65 does not mean he averages 8 wins. It means he averages 7 wins and is more likely to win 8 than he is 6 but his number is still 7 until it is 8.
Wrong again. He averages 7.53 wins. That does not mean that 7 is his average
↑
Yes it s closer but close here shows you that if he doesnt win 7 he is much more likely to win 8 than 6 but his average is still 7.
Wrong again. Average
- We could expect a mean value to be drawn from the underlying distribution to be as high as 0.66228. This would correspond (in a 13 game season) to an expectation value of 8.66 wins. We could also expect a mean value to be drawn from the underlying distribution to be as low as 0.56553. This would correspond (in a 13 game season) to an expectation value of 7.35 wins.
It really is upsetting to get called a name by a guy not smart enough to realize we dont play a 13 game schedule. In other words, you're not smart enough to offend me. Notice how all you name callers cant provide a single fleck of information yourself? You just throw poop at the wall and laugh about it. Dont breed.
Laquinta I would like to thank you for A) starting a thread that exposed some less than intelligent posters and B) continuing to post so that all with a brain can identify said posters.
It was my pleasure exposing you as an obtuse knob.
Yeah, cuz you sure did that with all the facts you have provided.... is this where I call you an acute inlet?
Pretty confident in that bowl victory with a coach who is sub .500 in bowl games are ya?
I'm willing to bet you're .596 at life. So far we have had Rog get proven wrong and disappear for a few days, blood went all passive aggressive beta last night and didnt realize there is such thing as a time stamp, you want to throw your name in the ring?
SHOW ME THE NUMBERS.
SHOW ME THE NUMBERS.
