Question: What counts as a "winning team"?

[Rebel10]

A win is really not a win and a loss is really not a loss. All June needs is an IPF and SMU is BCS bound.

[ponyboy]

What's the truth on your personal list of priorities?

[sbsmith]

That settles it, record against winning teams is no longer valid. Let's see what else we can invalidate.

[Rebel10]

That settles it, record against winning teams is no longer valid. Let's see what else we can invalidate.

Just remember it's not whether you win or lose it's how you play the game. Just play a good game. But it does beg the question what counts as a "good game?"

[ponyboy]

All I'm saying is that it's just a good idea to take stats with a grain of salt. "Doesn't beat winning teams" is more complicated than it appears on the surface.

And let me also say this: I do believe it's possible to reason through something without having already determined the answer and then working backwards with selected data to that previously determined conclusion. Not everything is politics.

In other words, I do assume reasonable conversations are possible. Maybe I'm wrong.

[Rebel10]

All I'm saying is that it's just a good idea to take stats with a grain of salt. "Doesn't beat winning teams" is more complicated than it appears on the surface.

And let me also say this: I do believe it's possible to reason through something without having already determined the answer and then working backwards with selected data to that previously determined conclusion. Not everything is politics. I do assume reasonable conversations are possible. Maybe I'm wrong.

What counts as a "grain of salt?"

[Mustangsabu]

Stata don't lie. Most people just don't understand them. This is such a case.

[redpony]

If you go to the race track and bet $5 dollars, lose it on the first race, bet another $5 and win then you have won $5 and lost $5 and are even. Can you actually honestly say you had a 'winning' day at the track?

[Stallion]

All I'm saying is that it's just a good idea to take stats with a grain of salt. "Doesn't beat winning teams" is more complicated than it appears on the surface.

And let me also say this: I do believe it's possible to reason through something without having already determined the answer and then working backwards with selected data to that previously determined conclusion. Not everything is politics. I do assume reasonable conversations are possible. Maybe I'm wrong.

What counts as a "grain of salt?"

Funny. This is CLASSIC Ponyboy

[ponyboy]

How would you define a "winning team," Stallion?

[Stallion]

I think this is a [deleted]' waste of time. Go play with yourself

[ponyboy]

I love you.

[malonish]

The fallacy of petitio principii, or "begging the question", is committed "when a proposition which requires proof is assumed without proof." It does not mean to raise a question.

[Rebel10]

If you go to the race track and bet $5 dollars, lose it on the first race, bet another $5 and win then you have won $5 and lost $5 and are even. Can you actually honestly say you had a 'winning' day at the track?

It depends on how you understand the stats.

[Rebel10]

Stata don't lie. Most people just don't understand them.

Do you have any stats to prove that most people just don't understand them?