Clay Burton blocked really well against UK

Discussion in 'Swamp Gas' started by GATORAZ, Oct 1, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    56,508
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,515
    Again, you're using speculation to attempt to invalidate the value of sample size.

    It's ludicrous.
  2. Pieisyummy
    Offline

    Pieisyummy Active Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    851
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Ratings Received:
    +83
    Lol, no, more straw grasping. I said it was an assertion, you said "It's not a statistical assertion" I said yeah, it was an assertion, not a statistical one, i.e. you'd constructed a straw man.
  3. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    56,508
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,515
    Is "grasping at straws" just your goto deflection? It's getting kind of boring.
  4. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    56,508
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,515
    "5 is statistically insignificant to determine that someone sucks"

    "yeah but maybe it isn't insignificant because he sucks?"

    (dear god help me)
  5. Pieisyummy
    Offline

    Pieisyummy Active Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    851
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Ratings Received:
    +83
    You're refusing to answer. You've granted shortcomings will result in a small sample size, so do you grant that among these could be his inability to catch which, however insignificant, is better supported than, say, hangovers?
  6. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    56,508
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,515
    I did not. I've said this already. I'm not sure if you're just not reading or incapable of comprehending.
  7. Pieisyummy
    Offline

    Pieisyummy Active Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    851
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Ratings Received:
    +83
    I'm showing how you're grasping at straws and deflecting when I say such.
  8. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    56,508
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,515
    Frankly, you have very little understanding of statistics and I'm really trying to help you understand how flawed your argument is.

    If you're just going to respond with "grasping at straws" when I'm discussing fundamentals of statistics, I guess I should just concede that you don't care.
  9. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    56,508
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,515
    You're attempting to invalidate the importance of sample size with speculation. I don't understand how you don't see that.
  10. Pieisyummy
    Offline

    Pieisyummy Active Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    851
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Ratings Received:
    +83
    Nothing wrong there, just feigned disgust for lack of showing how it's wrong. Makes perfect sense that you'd throw less often to those who suck than those who don't.

    "0 is statistically insignificant to determine that Halapio can't catch"

    "well maybe he has 0 because he can't catch; he's a guard."

    is the exact same reasoning.
  11. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    56,508
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,515
    But again, purely assumptive. Not quantifiable. Valueless.
  12. Pieisyummy
    Offline

    Pieisyummy Active Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    851
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Ratings Received:
    +83
    Does "teaching me fundamentals of statistics" include randomly saying "I didn't make a statistical assertion" when I said you made an assertion, i.e. not a "statistical" one?
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page