Poll

Which would you have thought was more unlikely

Indians winning 21 straight games and counting
2 (33.3%)
Dodgers losing 11 straight games
4 (66.7%)

Total Members Voted: 6

Author Topic: More Unlikely - Indians (winning 21 straight) or Dodgers (losing 11 straight)  (Read 310 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: More Unlikely - Indians (winning 21 straight) or Dodgers (losing 11 straight)
« Reply #15 on: September 13, 2017, 07:31:18 PM »

Offline Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23131
  • Tommy Points: 955
  • What a Pub Should Be
Cleveland was exponentially less likely to win 21 in a row than the Dodgers lose 11 in a row.  Simple probability theory tells us it's not even close.

It's really this simple.   

CLE by a wide margin here.

Right, except for actual math =).

Sure.  But how many 11 game losing streaks have you seen in the history of baseball?  Plenty.  Maybe much less like with upper echelon teams but you can count the number of teams that have done what CLE just achieved with less than two hands (one depending on how you fall with the tie thing)


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: More Unlikely - Indians (winning 21 straight) or Dodgers (losing 11 straight)
« Reply #16 on: September 13, 2017, 07:58:55 PM »

Offline byennie

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1720
  • Tommy Points: 227
Cleveland was exponentially less likely to win 21 in a row than the Dodgers lose 11 in a row.  Simple probability theory tells us it's not even close.

It's really this simple.   

CLE by a wide margin here.

Right, except for actual math =).

Sure.  But how many 11 game losing streaks have you seen in the history of baseball?  Plenty.  Maybe much less like with upper echelon teams but you can count the number of teams that have done what CLE just achieved with less than two hands (one depending on how you fall with the tie thing)

Not by the best team in the league. That's the point. If the worst team in the league lost 11 in a row, it wouldn't be a big deal.

The opposite is true, too: A top team is more likely to win 21 in a row than the worst team winning 11 in a row.
---
Lucky17 Yahoo! Points League: Jackalopes
Offseason Tracker

Re: More Unlikely - Indians (winning 21 straight) or Dodgers (losing 11 straight)
« Reply #17 on: September 13, 2017, 08:01:03 PM »

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7181
  • Tommy Points: 740
Cleveland was exponentially less likely to win 21 in a row than the Dodgers lose 11 in a row.  Simple probability theory tells us it's not even close.

It's really this simple.   

CLE by a wide margin here.

Right, except for actual math =).

Sure.  But how many 11 game losing streaks have you seen in the history of baseball?  Plenty.  Maybe much less like with upper echelon teams but you can count the number of teams that have done what CLE just achieved with less than two hands (one depending on how you fall with the tie thing)
Yeah I think keeping the win probability consistent through 21 games is obviously a huge source of error.

That said I'd be willing to bet that 0 teams have had 11 game losing streaks after playing 100+ games at a 69+% pace. This team was projecting to maybe break the all time win record. Prior to the 17 game skid and even after the first 5 game losing streak were pushing a .700 %
Quote from: George W. Bush
Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions.

Re: More Unlikely - Indians (winning 21 straight) or Dodgers (losing 11 straight)
« Reply #18 on: September 13, 2017, 08:05:58 PM »

Offline Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23131
  • Tommy Points: 955
  • What a Pub Should Be
Cleveland was exponentially less likely to win 21 in a row than the Dodgers lose 11 in a row.  Simple probability theory tells us it's not even close.

It's really this simple.   

CLE by a wide margin here.

Right, except for actual math =).

Sure.  But how many 11 game losing streaks have you seen in the history of baseball?  Plenty.  Maybe much less like with upper echelon teams but you can count the number of teams that have done what CLE just achieved with less than two hands (one depending on how you fall with the tie thing)

Not by the best team in the league. That's the point. If the worst team in the league lost 11 in a row, it wouldn't be a big deal.

The opposite is true, too: A top team is more likely to win 21 in a row than the worst team winning 11 in a row.

Oh for sure.  Not denying that.  Even said so with upper echelon teams.  I just think winning 20+ games (regardless of who you are) is insanely difficult to do in a sport like baseball where the day to day stuff is so up & down in that sport.  Impresses me more than losing streaks. Even by good teams.

I'll leave the probability stuff up to you guys.  I admit I was taking SL's word as gold there (which is almost always spot on) but seemed sound to me.  I just look at the history of baseball and come across far more impressed with what CLE has accomplished that what the Dodgers have blundered the past couple of weeks
« Last Edit: September 13, 2017, 08:27:20 PM by Donoghus »


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: More Unlikely - Indians (winning 21 straight) or Dodgers (losing 11 straight)
« Reply #19 on: September 13, 2017, 08:26:27 PM »

Offline byennie

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1720
  • Tommy Points: 227
Oh for sure.  Not denying that.  Even said so with upper echelon teams.  I just think winning 20+ games (regardless of who you are) is insanely difficult to do in a sport like baseball where the day to day stuff is so up & down in that sport.  Impresses me more than losing streaks. Even by good teams.

I'll leave the probability stuff up to you guys.  I admit I was taking SL's word as gold there (which is almost spot on) but seemed sound to me.  I just look at the history of baseball and come across far more impressed with what CLE has accomplished that what the Dodgers have blundered the past couple of weeks

Cool, yeah I can buy that. There's also the whole psychology of it. We can throw around numbers and percentages, but you could argue that it's a lot harder to maintain a high level for that long. In other words, "being" a .750 team with some luck on top for 4+ weeks is super hard, but pretty much any team can lie down and play .300 ball for 2-3 weeks with some bad luck on top of it.
---
Lucky17 Yahoo! Points League: Jackalopes
Offseason Tracker