Mate, are you not a little bit embarrassed that you actually posted this? Read it back to yourself again, you’re a joke.
I have no embarrassment at all. I'm an analyst and in part a statistician. I deal in probability, trend analysis and the like. I understand the importance of variables and how they need to be applied to obtain reliable consistent results. you clearly do not.
You have ducked, dived and dodged the clearest of FACTS presented to you, (like how it is IMPOSSIBLE for a positive average to disappear to absolute zero - even if you have an infinite number of following null results). you base your results and projects on the position after the event when the whole premise of your theory is to predict the outcome of forthcoming events, ie. you CANNOT obtain reliable results by using the position of a team after an event.
When anyone presents these clear facts to you, you call them thick and lacking in understanding which actually suggest the opposite - it's you who is lacking in understanding.
Then, to top it all off, you start the name calling which to me suggests you've lost not only the plot but the argument as well.
Clearly, the overwhelming number of replies to this thread that debunk your theory have sent you over the edge. Anyway, I'll leave it at that. I'm not going to get myself drawn in any further and tarred with the same brush....
