[shyams]

Can I predict a possible (albeit unlikely) scenario?

The draw is very favourable to the winners of Group G.
1. The winner plays Runners-Up from Group H (Belgium, Russia, S Korea, Algeria) in the Round of 16. It could easily be Russia.
2. The winner of (1.) will potentially face France, Nigeria or Switzerland in the Quarter Finals. Any of these teams could lose on their day.

I bet USA to win their group and then go on to defeat the runner-up from Group H. It'll be quite something to see USA play France in the QF!

[MickyB]

 MickyB, on 2014-June-09, 10:47, said:

Based on the Betfair market, Brazil/Germany/Spain to win = 49%

 hrothgar, on 2014-June-11, 16:25, said:

I'd take your side (and wish I could get some of that action)

www.betfair.com

[MickyB]

 Aberlour10, on 2014-June-11, 15:16, said:

I am not experienced in these things. but suppose this counting bases on the addition of chances of all 21 remaining teams.

If we skip the additon of teams which WC win is only theoritically possible I think , that would bring more than 49% for Germany, Brazil and Spain.

Is it true, or I am wrong with that logic here?

Ten teams with a "theoretical" 0.5% chance still have a total chance to win of 5%.

[Aberlour10]

 MickyB, on 2014-June-11, 17:13, said:

Ten teams with a "theoretical" 0.5% chance still have a total chance to win of 5%.

Sure but we talk here about real bet and real chances, so I would add this 5% ( and more) to the Brazil, Germany Spain side.

[mike777]

I wonder if Fifa takes a position on machine made legs or knees or hips for its players at the world cup as medicine advances?

The continuing melding of man and machine over the next few years.

[gwnn]

And where do you draw the line between theoretical odds and real ones? 0.5% is too little, how about 1%? 5%? Why not neglect all odds except Brazil's? That way it is 100%. Neglecting odds is a mistake and the more odds you neglect the larger the mistake you are making.

[Fluffy]

 gwnn, on 2014-June-09, 09:46, said:

Fluffy, are you saying that the Swedish tv photoshopped the video?

No, "Diario As" made a photoshop on a picture in a match from Real Madrid. I don't have access to any swedish news/newspapers.


I would bet Brazil/Spain/Germany for sure, I think it is only 49% because there is a pretty high chance Spain meets Brazil right after groups.

[helene_t]

Suppose Trinidad & Tobago has a 0.000001 chance of winning. Can you really get odds 1 mio on betfair? I can imagine bookies are adverse against that sort of risks. Maybe it depends how many people put bets on T&T
FWIW English premier league matches are priced correctly in the sense that a punter who systematically backs underdogs will break even. Probably this is also true for world cup but maybe not quite.

[gwnn]

 Fluffy, on 2014-June-12, 01:07, said:

No, "Diario As" made a photoshop on a picture in a match from Real Madrid. I don't have access to any swedish news/newspapers.


I would bet Brazil/Spain/Germany for sure, I think it is only 49% because there is a pretty high chance Spain meets Brazil right after groups.

I know you were talking about As and ranting against Real Madrid, but what does it have to do with the Norway game? That was a real penalty but somehow the angle that proved it got lost during the match. So I guess you are just using any opportunity to rant against Real, next time I guess you will say, in a thread called 'Penalty or takeout?' 'I don't know but Real Madrid always get free penalties.'

[mike777]

I hope I put myself on brazil on the vague basis of passion and home field advantage, based on internet

fwiw I read and hear that Germany has the most talent and the best team but that is only based on internet so....I expect many here to reject experts and go on testable evidence and not gossip as I do.

I am concerned that usa may finish 32 out of 32 and not score a single, yes a single goal in world cup.....can our boys beat that? you guys are so good, I mean can we score one goal, one silly goal in the group?

--------


perhaps in future usa can win if we can deploy machine made legs that scores goals?

[helene_t]

The probability is actually 55% with Brasil, Spain and Germany having odds 1/3, 1/5 and 2/13. Maybe Micky read Germany's odds as 1/13 instead of 2/13. Or maybe the odds have changed in the meantime.

[Fluffy]

 gwnn, on 2014-June-12, 01:22, said:

I know you were talking about As and ranting against Real Madrid, but what does it have to do with the Norway game? That was a real penalty but somehow the angle that proved it got lost during the match. So I guess you are just using any opportunity to rant against Real, next time I guess you will say, in a thread called 'Penalty or takeout?' 'I don't know but Real Madrid always get free penalties.'

I won't say that, but it is true that Portugal's chances on this eurocup depend on the ammount of penalties they get to shoot during the game...

[Fluffy]

Now I look at it, Argentina has a much higher chances than it did last time I looked (1 year ago during confederation cup)

[Zelandakh]

 gwnn, on 2014-June-12, 01:22, said:

That was a real penalty but somehow the angle that proved it got lost during the match.

I think the problem was that the person in charge of the replays thought the penalty had been given for handball despite the referee's gestures making it clear it was a foul. They thus started the replays too late missing the key moment. Even the regular camera would have shown the jersey pull if the replay had shown the entire scene. The later angle was obviously bad for showing a handball and I assume that is the reason it was rejected for an in-game replay.

 mike777, on 2014-June-12, 02:10, said:

I am concerned that usa may finish 32 out of 32 and not score a single, yes a single goal in world cup.....can our boys beat that? you guys are so good, I mean can we score one goal, one silly goal in the group?

The USA has enough talent to beat Ghana and with some luck could get a result against Germany and/or Portugal. It is not going to be easy though and this is a very tough group for them. The USA team is absolutely not the worst there, not even the worst from the Americas. But yes, it can happen that they do not score a goal. It has happened before with some good teams.

[Trinidad]

 mike777, on 2014-June-11, 19:57, said:

I wonder if Fifa takes a position on machine made legs or knees or hips for its players at the world cup as medicine advances?

The continuing melding of man and machine over the next few years.

I haven't come across something like that in soccer. (Perhaps I am blind.) I have heard that parents are trying to get their kids who are high school baseball pitchers to get preventive Tommy John surgery. Their hope is that this will add a few mph to their fastballs.

Rik

[mike777]

 Trinidad, on 2014-June-12, 03:05, said:

I haven't come across something like that in soccer. (Perhaps I am blind.) I have heard that parents are trying to get their kids who are high school baseball pitchers to get preventive Tommy John surgery. Their hope is that this will add a few mph to their fastballs.

Rik

I argue in these forum posts for the melding of man and machine over the many years.

One simple example is machine made contact lenses which improves vision greater than 20/20 average vision. Vision is very important in the world cup.
At some point will machine made legs be legal, machine made hips, machine made knees in world cup?

another simple every day example are hearing aids made by machines, are you going to simple forbid any and all machine made hearing aides of any type?

I note people seem to want to just ignore this issue, put their heads in the ground and act as ostrich.

I don't know,.....I don't see...I don't etc

[Aberlour10]

 gwnn, on 2014-June-12, 00:56, said:

And where do you draw the line between theoretical odds and real ones? 0.5% is too little, how about 1%? 5%? Why not neglect all odds except Brazil's? That way it is 100%. Neglecting odds is a mistake and the more odds you neglect the larger the mistake you are making.

The real life draws the line, the facts of the football.

No one of these teams will be World Champion this time to 99,9% >>> not the mathematical odds but with common sense.

Australia, South Korea, Cameroon, Japan, Nigeria, Iran,, Ghana, Honduras, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Ivory Coast, Algeria, Bosnia, USA, Switzerland...

I dont know what is the addition of their odds but its doesent matter in the real football life.

[helene_t]

Robert, 0.1% doesn't mean impossible. Impossible means 0% exact. The probability that the Catalonian Venice cup team wins the Greenlandian mens' championship in sumo wrestling may be 0%, and the probability that Honduras wins WC2014 may in fact be lower than 0.1%. The latter could happen, though.

In 2004, Greece won the European championship. They might have been the lowest of all 16 seeds or at least close.

In 1992 Denmark won which was even more surprising since they didn't even qualify for the event

So not all swans are white. The fact that no 1% seed or below has ever won the World Cup doesn't mean that it will never happen.

[Aberlour10]

 helene_t, on 2014-June-12, 05:08, said:

So not all swans are white. The fact that no 1% seed or below has ever won the World Cup doesn't mean that it will never happen.

Maybe in 1000 tries or so. But we have only one here. Surely polish or hungarian ice hockey teams have the odds for winnig the next WC, but what does it have with the reality to do?

[gwnn]

http://en.wikipedia...._of_probability