Introduction to Entertainment Index and Performance Index

For me it's not so much the name, it's more the way that it's clearly based on YOUR entertainment and what entertains YOU but you seem to try to claim it's universal entertainment and distance yourself from the fact that it's simply your opinion.

As your opinion it's really interesting, I completely disagree with what is entertaining but that's fine that's what opinions are for.
As a 'this IS how entertaining the game was and this is based on facts and is independent from my opinion' it becomes utter rubbish because that's not what it is.

Take ownership of it being your own personal entertainment and write about it as what you find entertaining rather than trying to pass it off as what everyone should find entertaining and you'll get much more favourable replies because it IS interesting seeing and understanding what a fellow fan enjoys, people just don't tend to like being told what they should also enjoy.

 

But would you be so upset if the index was called say, the Cauliflower Index. It would still be based upon the same data and it would still have the same scoring system, but it is now called something less emotive.

 

That depends, if you were telling people that they should be 85 points of cauliflowered because it's based on completely independent data and not your opinion then yeah. If you say this is how cauliflowered I was today and this is the reason why I was then no.

 

Perhaps rather than change the names, just amend them to strengthen the ownership...

Red Rain's Entertainment Score
Red Rain's Performance Score

 

In future, they will be part of Minority Report, so that much will be obvious. This week I was simply trying to introduce the indexes and showing that I did not need to have seen the game in order to calculate them. From most reports of those present, the indexes were spot on for the game at Bournemouth.

 

Instead of Entertainment Index, what about Contribution Index. The index describes each team's contribution to the game, and the phrase does not contain the banned word that shall henceforth, never be used again.

 

Radical idea, bear with me.

put the ball in the opposition net - 1 goal

get more goals than the opposition , eg 1-0, 2-1 etc then you get 3 points, they get 0 points

Score the same goals as the opposition or neither team score then each team gets 1 point

after you’ve played each team in your division twice (home & away) then your points are totalled and the division is ranked top to bottom by how many points each team gets.

it’s a simple concept so obviously lesser mortals can understand it, but it does save a lot of right old monkey jizz being debated about how to judge football.

 

How does that massage anyone's ego and make them feel superior and important, though? Think you missed the objective of this index. Must try harder. B-

 

like I said, lesser mortals…

apologies to all readers operating on a higher plane

 

Extra marks in future if you refer to yourself in third person.

 

EN notes your advice

 

PR notes your note. PR however expresses incredulity at RR insistence you can be entertained without seeing the match. PR states this is utterly bonkers but enjoys the way RR tries. It amuses him.

 

Once again you refuse to read what's written. There Is no banned word just banned pompous pontificating about how your system is THE system

 

Fair enough. Sorry for the light-hearted response.

 

What sort of 'insight' are we intended to have from this project?

 

Personally, I am most looking forward to the monthly league tables. By the end of September, we will be 10 games into the season and I will have 10 games worth of information about all the teams. The monthly league tables will summarise this information and allow comparison between our actual league position, our league position as indicated by the Performance Index and our league position as indicated by our Entertainment Index, as well as all that information for the previous month end. For example, last month, Sheffield United had a much better league position in the Performance Index table than in the Championship Table. It indicated that the team was probably in a false position. To be honest, I do not know what inconsistencies will be thrown up and that is why I was vague about it. All I really know is that I will have lots of data that it will be summarised and compared in lots of different ways, and that is bound to throw up some interesting questions.

That is just an example of the insight that I expect to get out of the system. However, whether you get the same insight depends upon how far you are prepared to go along with me. There has been a lot of criticism in this thread, and to be honest, I was not sure whether to answer you because I feared that I would be merely opening the door to yet more of the same. I really do hope that you can see that data analysis can provide great insight, and your own data analysis of the horses gives me that hope.

 

I think all posters on this forum should have an Entertainment index and Total ******** rating ascribed every month by admin.
I'm sure my entertainment rating would be crap and my total ******** rating would be outstanding.

 

I'm not sure I need to know that your ******** are outstanding.

 

The issue isn't the name, the issue is that you present an objective system as the be all and end all and pretend it's all factual and not based off opinion. Your system is to tell people how much you enjoyed the game, not how enjoyable the game was. You present it as the latter though.

 

I think it's interesting that you should pick out Sheffield United. Watching many of their games last season, they didn't appear to me to be playing too badly and were only narrowly beaten in several of them. However they did lose regularly, and ultimately were relegated by a wide margin (relative to the fourth-bottom club). League position is the acid test. I don't know whether they would have rated well on either your Entertainment Index or Performance Index last season, but if so, it would not have assisted them to stay up. Interesting though your analysis is, I don't think football occupies a big enough part in my life to want to study an evaluation to that level, whether or not the method of analysis is legitimate (and you have made a good case for it).

I thought you might mention horseracing! You are right to say that I spend a lot of time looking at data on horseracing. In that case the study serves two purposes. Firstly it provides a means of comparing performances across different race lengths, ground conditions and even as between different generations, so that those interested in such things can form a better assessment of the merit of different horses. Secondly, it provides a foundation for assessing the relative chances of horses in future races, which may be the subject of investment! My records across nine years show that the average price I obtained about winning selections would have required me to find the winners of 30.75% of the races in which I bet. My actual (up to date) strike rate across that period was 31.38%. That may seem a very small margin, but it is enough to generate a meaningful profit across a long timespan. My stakes are not great, but there is satisfaction in the intellectual challenge of coming out ahead. In this, you are not "beating the bookies" as is commonly said. They are only middle men. You are in fact beating your fellow punters, who all have their own opinions. It is in the way of things that it is their losses that must pay for your profits.

What I take from this is that it is interesting to consider how the extent to which we are invested in these sports (whether emotionally, intellectually or financially) determines the level of detail in which we wish to scrutinize them!