Relegation Odds

[S72 Owl]

We’ve been in the bottom 2 pretty much all season, of course we’re favourites to go down. 
 

No matter how many we win we just can’t seem to get out of it.

[DJMortimer]

3 hours ago, ChapSmurf said:

Draws kill you in many ways, and I think part of the reason we're actually still in with a shout of survival is due to the lack of them.

 

The myth that simply refuses to die.

 

EVERY single season at EVERY single level, the tables reflect the utter randomness of how draws are distributed. There simply is no correlation whatsoever. And when you consider that you get either three or zero points in the games that you don't draw, all the more bewildering that people keep emphasising them like this.

[alanharper]

10 minutes ago, S72 Owl said:

We’ve been in the bottom 2 pretty much all season, of course we’re favourites to go down. 
 

No matter how many we win we just can’t seem to get out of it.

 

Giving the rest of the league a 13 game start didn't really help with this.

[alanharper]

7 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

 

The myth that simply refuses to die.

 

EVERY single season at EVERY single level, the tables reflect the utter randomness of how draws are distributed. There simply is no correlation whatsoever. And when you consider that you get either three or zero points in the games that you don't draw, all the more bewildering that people keep emphasising them like this.

 

Oddly enough, all but four other teams in the division have drawn more games than us, yet two of our five draws were against the other teams who rarely draw.

[ChapSmurf]

4 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

 

The myth that simply refuses to die.

 

EVERY single season at EVERY single level, the tables reflect the utter randomness of how draws are distributed. There simply is no correlation whatsoever. And when you consider that you get either three or zero points in the games that you don't draw, all the more bewildering that people keep emphasising them like this.

 

You're looking at it too literally. I totally agree with what you've said, but that's not what the phrase is really alluding to. Is it better to go and attempt to get three points, than sit tight for a draw? Of course it is. And sometimes, doing so, will result in zero points. And sometimes, it won't.

 

I would suggest, without doing any analysis or research, that those teams, who are capable during a match of getting all three points, would fare better over the season, than those who aren't, simply because they are going for the win. If a team pushes, and gets two extra wins a season from having this ability or mentality, that's four extra points gained (above the 2 points gained for drawing those two games). 6 points in two games, that would take 6 games to achieve if those games were draws.

 

We've 10 games left. We'll run out of games if we draw too many, and that will kill us.

[royalowlisback]

6 minutes ago, ChapSmurf said:

 

You're looking at it too literally. I totally agree with what you've said, but that's not what the phrase is really alluding to. Is it better to go and attempt to get three points, than sit tight for a draw? Of course it is. And sometimes, doing so, will result in zero points. And sometimes, it won't.

 

I would suggest, without doing any analysis or research, that those teams, who are capable during a match of getting all three points, would fare better over the season, than those who aren't, simply because they are going for the win. If a team pushes, and gets two extra wins a season from having this ability or mentality, that's four extra points gained (above the 2 points gained for drawing those two games). 6 points in two games, that would take 6 games to achieve if those games were draws.

 

We've 10 games left. We'll run out of games if we draw too many, and that will kill us.

9 games left. 

[Tommy Crawshaw]

21 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

 

The myth that simply refuses to die.

 

EVERY single season at EVERY single level, the tables reflect the utter randomness of how draws are distributed. There simply is no correlation whatsoever. And when you consider that you get either three or zero points in the games that you don't draw, all the more bewildering that people keep emphasising them like this.

 

I think it depends on league position and ambitions.

 

If you're aim is promotion a lot of draws aren't helpful and in that case draws do 'kill you'.

 

When you're fighting relegation every single point is vital. A few more draws instead of all those defeats would have obviously been far better for us.

[Jim]

42 minutes ago, Tommy Crawshaw said:

 

I think it depends on league position and ambitions.

 

If you're aim is promotion a lot of draws aren't helpful and in that case draws do 'kill you'.

 

When you're fighting relegation every single point is vital. A few more draws instead of all those defeats would have obviously been far better for us.

Of course you’re right but come 18 games in, draws were never going to be enough. In truth they aren’t enough now either.

[DJMortimer]

39 minutes ago, Tommy Crawshaw said:

 

I think it depends on league position and ambitions.

 

If you're aim is promotion a lot of draws aren't helpful and in that case draws do 'kill you'.

 

When you're fighting relegation every single point is vital. A few more draws instead of all those defeats would have obviously been far better for us.

 

Even this isn't strictly true. For example, in the two divisions below us, the leaders (Portsmouth and Mansfield) have the third and second most draws respectively. 

 

[Geörge Whitebread]

4 hours ago, Tommy Crawshaw said:

We simply can't afford to lose the '6 pointers' against Blackburn, QPR and Stoke.

 

Winning those games would be brilliant but draws wouldn't be the end of the world. Providing we can win 3/4 of the other games.

 

Draw all 3 of those and the chances of us staying up is very slim, imho.

 

Not only does that mean we'll've failed to make up ground on them, but we'll also need to win much tougher games.

 

You'd like to think we have a good chance of beating Swansea at home; but Ipswich, WBA and Norwich all need the points for their promotion campaign, so they'll not be easy games.

 

Boro and Sunderland won't have so much to play for, but neither are mugs, and with both being away games, they'll not be easy either.

 

 

4 hours ago, Tommy Crawshaw said:

If we had drawn at Huddersfield, we'd be now 3 points above them with a better goal difference, and level on points with QPR and Birmingham. 

 

If we had beaten Huddersfield, we'd be 6 points above them with a better goal difference and 2 points above QPR and Birmingham. So, I'm not sure what your point is, unless you think we only lost because we didn't set up to avoid defeat... I couldn't disagree with that more. 

 

Xisco's approach was to avoid defeat. I don't know if you remember those dark days, but it didn't exactly yield the best results. 

 

[ChapSmurf]

4 hours ago, royalowlisback said:

9 games left. 

 

Erm, I posted that before the Leeds match. Yeah, that's it.

What makes this worse is I actually thought we'd played 38 games, and still believed we had 10 games left. I've no hope of being taken seriously, have I.

 

Nurse!

[Geörge Whitebread]

4 hours ago, ChapSmurf said:

 We've 10 games left. We'll run out of games if we draw too many, and that will kill us.

 

[Tommy Crawshaw]

14 hours ago, Geörge Whitebread said:

If we had beaten Huddersfield, we'd be 6 points above them with a better goal difference and 2 points above QPR and Birmingham. So, I'm not sure what your point is, unless you think we only lost because we didn't set up to avoid defeat... I couldn't disagree with that more. 

 

Xisco's approach was to avoid defeat. I don't know if you remember those dark days, but it didn't exactly yield the best results. 

 

 

My point is obviously if you can't win against relegation rivals, at least don't lose the game, which would be disastrous. 

 

As I said we would be in a lot better position now if we had drawn against Huddersfield instead of getting thumped.

 

We would now be 3 points above them with a better goal difference and level on points with QPR and Birmingham. 

 

[WimJunk]

30 goals scored is pitiful and if Ugbo stops scoring, we are in real trouble again.

 

None of our midfielders are goal scorers and the forwards are ageing or crocks.

[alanharper]

3 minutes ago, WimJunk said:

30 goals scored is pitiful and if Ugbo stops scoring, we are in real trouble again.

 

None of our midfielders are goal scorers and the forwards are ageing or crocks.

 

Again, mainly due to our pathetic opening 13 games before Röhl started to turn us around.

 

3 points and just 5 goals scored in the first 13 games (3 of which were scored in the first 2 games!) - 0.23 points per game and 0.38 goals per game, but in the last 24 games we've averaged 1.45 points and 1.04 goals per game.  Still not great scoringwise, but a huge improvement. If we stay up with the lowest number of goals scored in the league I'll take that.

[El Wednesday]

19 hours ago, DJMortimer said:

 

The myth that simply refuses to die.

 

EVERY single season at EVERY single level, the tables reflect the utter randomness of how draws are distributed. There simply is no correlation whatsoever. And when you consider that you get either three or zero points in the games that you don't draw, all the more bewildering that people keep emphasising them like this.

Paul Sturrock was a fan of this school of thought. Think he just meant it's better to blow hot and cold and WLWLW games than go on an unbeaten run of lots of draws.

Which is what we've actually been doing under Röhl.

Mind you, I'd blummin love a draw at the weekend. 

 

[Geörge Whitebread]

1 hour ago, Tommy Crawshaw said:

 

My point is obviously if you can't win against relegation rivals, at least don't lose the game, which would be disastrous. 

 

As I said we would be in a lot better position now if we had drawn against Huddersfield instead of getting thumped.

 

We would now be 3 points above them with a better goal difference and level on points with QPR and Birmingham. 

 

 

 

Drawing those games sends us down.

 

[TodwickOwl]

Xisco killed us

 

We need wins on the board before we think about draws right now 

[HirstWhoScoredIt]

On 12/03/2024 at 08:54, Geörge Whitebread said:

 

 

Hmm... I know what you're saying, but if that reasoning is applied to every club, only one would be relegated this season. 

 

The odds suggest that they / the market believe(s) we're the next most likely (after our already-relegated neighbours) to face the drop. 

 

I don't think we are the next most likely. I think the market / bookies have that wrong.

 

That’s not correct.

 

The bookies think there is a 100% chance that two teams will go down in addition to Rotherham.

 

They think there’s a 47% chance that we are one of the two.

[MF TAZ]

If we got out the bottom three they wouldn’t have us that high to go down 

 

they just do it based on where you are 

 

odd how they avoid form in their sums

 

be interested in their odds purely for us to survive but on my betting apps they don’t do a ‘to survive’ option