Howe's Half Arsed Wank Pots v Nuno's Affable Scab Bastards

[Gemmill 49415]

I didn't do that. 

 

You asked me (AGAIN) for an explanation. I gave it to you and in response I got a fucking critique of my explanation. 

 

Try fucking remember it this time, CUNTFACE! 

[PaddockLad 18881]

9 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

I didn't do that. 

 

You asked me (AGAIN) for an explanation. I gave it to you and in response I got a fucking critique of my explanation. 

 

Try fucking remember it this time, CUNTFACE! 

ok, is xg the same as xpoints? 
 

I said earlier I didn’t want to spoil your daily opportunity to be patronising but I didn’t expect you to react this badly after I gave you the opportunity  

 

xpoints is a different thing, you didn’t need to explain xg, you could’ve just explained how they’re related like a normal person. Sorry to trouble you. 

[Gemmill 49415]

If you'd asked a different question, I'd have answered that, aye. 

[PaddockLad 18881]

I asked how is xpoints calculated… 

 

here endeth the lesson 🙏🏻

[Gemmill 49415]

And I told you. For about the 7th time. You're welcome. 

[OTF 8312]

2 hours ago, Gemmill said:

 

For probably the 7th time.... 

 

Take each shot or header with an XG value for both teams. Each shot/header is considered standalone, so a 0.10xg shot, would result in a goal in 10% if the simulations. 

 

Run that through a model 10,000 times. 

 

Each time you do it, that simulation has a specific match result. 

 

Then you multiply out the percentages of the results. 

 

So if Newcastle win 60%, draw 30%, and lose 10%, it's:

 

60% x 3 points = 1.80

30% x 1 point = 0.30

10% x 0 points = 0.00

 

Total xP = 2.10

 

It's a good system cos it takes into account quality of chances. If you have a team that has 10 shots on target, all with 0.10xG, you'd expect no goal from those 90% of the time (for each shot). So running that through the model vs a team that had 4 shots each with 0.25xG.

 

Total xG for each team is 1xG. But the model will spit out different results because it considers the probabilities on a chance by chance basis, rather than just adding them up. 

 

[thebrokendoll 10172]

unbelievable.

gemmill has done a toonpack and killed the message board for the day.   

[Gemmill 49415]

Toonpack, arrest this man. 

[Toonpack 11199]

5 minutes ago, thebrokendoll said:

unbelievable.

gemmill has done a toonpack and killed the message board for the day.   

[Howmanheyman 36250]

"Fucking geddoff'iz you fucking bizzie cunt, whaddiva done?"

 

"Sir, I'm arresting you for a serious breach of not taking xG, xP and any other exes that gemmill mentions seriously. You do not have to say anything. But, it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence when ewerk dredges it up from his extensive toontastic database."

[PaddockLad 18881]

5 minutes ago, Howmanheyman said:

"Fucking geddoff'iz you fucking bizzie cunt, whaddiva done?"

 

"Sir, I'm arresting you for a serious breach of not taking xG, xP and any other exes that gemmill mentions seriously. You do not have to say anything. But, it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence when ewerk dredges it up from his extensive toontastic database."

And let’s face it, Gemma has more x’s than most on here 😀

 

[Gemmill 49415]

Only cos you waited til you were 60 to get married. Only a matter of time now... 

[Howmanheyman 36250]

"Gemmill v The Broken Doll,

xDs (divorces) Vs xBOs (Banning orders)

Moveable object Vs Stoppable Force

And IT'S LIVE!!!"

[PaddockLad 18881]

1 hour ago, Gemmill said:

Only cos you waited til you were 60 to get married. Only a matter of time now... 

 

Well it’s not good to rush into these things, as you illustrate beautifully  

[Gemmill 49415]

1 minute ago, PaddockLad said:

 

Well it’s not good to rush into these things, as you illustrate beautifully  

 

One day soon, you'll have had an argument, and she'll walk past one of your wedding photos in the hall, stop in her tracks, and actually say out loud "Did that cheeky cunt REALLY turn up like that to our wedding? IT'S OVER!"

 

Divorce papers will follow by the end of the day. 

[wykikitoon 22573]

 

 

 

[Dougle 3674]

Some fair points but he bloody rambles on far longer than needed'. Fuck me they even turned the lights out on him, like at last orders in a pub in the eighties.

Edited 14 hours ago by Dougle

[aimaad22 4599]

8 hours ago, Gemmill said:

I didn't do that. 

 

You asked me (AGAIN) for an explanation. I gave it to you and in response I got a fucking critique of my explanation. 

 

Try fucking remember it this time, CUNTFACE! 

 

The exEXPLANATION must be through the roof by now