Takeover (Covid-19/20)

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Laws of probability do not work like that.


At present there's a chance it go through and a chance it couldn't.

Surely there's nothing wrong with saying that? Given I was responding to Roland's comment on which he said he couldn't understand why anyone thinks it will still happen.

Is there another way you'd have preferred me to have explained it to him Mr Peterson?
 
At present there's a chance it go through and a chance it couldn't.

Surely there's nothing wrong with saying that? Given I was responding to Roland's comment on which he said he couldn't understand why anyone thinks it will still happen.

Is there another way you'd have preferred me to have explained it to him Mr Peterson?


Nope! :afro:
 
At present there's a chance it go through and a chance it couldn't.

Surely there's nothing wrong with saying that? Given I was responding to Roland's comment on which he said he couldn't understand why anyone thinks it will still happen.

Is there another way you'd have preferred me to have explained it to him Mr Peterson?
Let's take raining as an example.

It either rains or it doesn't rain.
Does that mean it's 50% chance of raining tomorrow?
 
You are though. Your saying because there are two possible outcomes then it's 50/50 and that is rubbish.


It's not going to rain today.

No I said it was a coin flip or more accurately that there's a chance either way.

BTW it wasn't me that said it I read what a QC said on the matter.


You never answered my question btw
 
At present there's a chance it go through and a chance it couldn't.

Surely there's nothing wrong with saying that? Given I was responding to Roland's comment on which he said he couldn't understand why anyone thinks it will still happen.

Is there another way you'd have preferred me to have explained it to him Mr Peterson?


@Darren Peacock's Ponytail

Please answer these questions
 
@Darren Peacock's Ponytail

Please answer these questions
We all know the possible outcomes so no need to further comment on it.

In terms of chances you either a) look at the facts and make a choice yay or nay or b) look at the last ten arbitrations involving a football club and an authority body and that will give you the probability. So for example if the football club won 7 times then that is 70% chance. You can only look at experimental probability and not theoretical
 
We all know the possible outcomes so no need to further comment on it.

In terms of chances you either a) look at the facts and make a choice yay or nay or b) look at the last ten arbitrations involving a football club and an authority body and that will give you the probability. So for example if the football club won 7 times then that is 70% chance. You can only look at experimental probability and not theoretical


Just to be clear I don't think it was necessary for me to answer Roland with all that ****.

He said he couldn't understand why anyone thinks it will happen, so in the simplest way I pointed out the fact there's a chance.

I understand you're maths teacher but it really is overkill to go any further than what I wrote.
 
Just to be clear I don't think it was necessary for me to answer Roland with all that ****.

He said he couldn't understand why anyone thinks it will happen, so in the simplest way I pointed out the fact there's a chance.

I understand you're maths teacher but it really is overkill to go any further than what I wrote.
Personally you repeatedly stating all possibilities is overkill. Then claiming it's 50/50 is plain wrong