YOUR logic, I think you'll find? My logic says: 1 is 1/2 of 2 = 50% and 1 is 1/48 of 48 = 2% approx. (BTW I think that the puddles at Fratton weren't caused by ponds- they came from within ) Particularly like your quote "Trouble is no one is wrong and no one is right........ Just one of the idiosyncrasies of mathematics" I wish they'd accepted THAT in my Maths A level exam!
Did you pass? I have an A Level in maths with statistics, albeit from a while ago. I still don't think that maths has changed as much as Beddy would have us believe, though.......
Now there is a coincidence I am a professor in maths and a masters in The logic of the equation. Either way you bloody well knew what I meant. By the way, if you take 100 as a whole and take one away that 1 equates to 99%. So go boil an egg.....
To join in with the Maths debate (on a football forum!? At least we don't fit with sterotypes!) This is correct. If you were scaling 48 up to 100, you would also have to scale up the 47 by the same factor otherwise the numbers would become completely irrelevant to each other, so if 48 is assumed to be 100 (%), the one missed would equate to 2.09 being missed out of 100.
As I remember from A Level Maths about 100 years ago, you can legitimately use approximations when things start trending towards zero, as in differential calculus and integration. If you are working out percentages you could say you only wanted the integer value of the percentage, in which case Matt Le Tiss scored approximately 98% of his penalties. I can't think of any way of fudging the equation so that he scored 100% of them! Sorry Beddy, I think you're on your own with this one!
Kept you buggers thinking though didn't it.............. Told you get in the queue get...in ...the....queue.
Logic does say though if he had scored all 48 he would have an 100% percent record........so because he missed one logic does say that would equate to a 99% percent record. 100-1=99 or have I got that wrong too......
Aha sorry that's wrong, you're assuming that each kick represents 1%, and in this case because there are only 48 kicks each kick represents (1/48)x100, which is 2.09%.
Scaling should only work if there is an overwhelming swing in one direction. For example, if everyone who took are penalties was **** then we could scale them up to provide a better idea of ability. If anything, they need to be scaled down due to having the like of Lambert, le Tiss etc. I'm only going by what happened with exam marks I got, which would be scaled
Urmmm, well we're not extrapolating, just making numbers out of 100 to make them easier to understand so technically the values aren't changing so they are not any less acurate. It's essentially fractions - 47/48 roughly= 98/100
I think somehow we have gone a shade off topic........All the working out percentages has made my head spin........ I think we need to get back on topic..... So who is the penalty King?? (incidentaly the equation worked out to 97.916 to three decimal points to be precise) I'll get me coat
Well the worst penalty taker has to be McGoldenDuck. Didn't he miss two penalties in one game for us once or am I making that up? He definitely missed at least one against Burnley.
I submit to you that 2% represents 96% of 2.08% (the correct answer) and further that 1% represents 48% of the right answer. Of course, Billy the Fish played for Fulchester United, and on occasion strange things happened like away goals counting double, but....... ....returning to the OP, it has to be Le Tiss, as he scored his goals in the top flight, and only missing one from that number is a remarkable record.
Alas, no! I took it at the same time as my O Levels - did the O Level maths early (shows my age). This over-reaching combined with the discovery of alcohol and girls, rather dissipated my efforts. Still, no matter, this is pre - O Level maths; even I can manage that!
