World Cup Odds: I need help.

[CorkerSWFC]

Thank god this wasnt asked on the tips thread lol.

[*_ash_*]

With the responses so far, it seems that as I thought, and pointed out in HeadingNorth's post, that using exact results would be close to filling screens with digits.

Apparently, it is just win lose or draw for each game.

 

The chances of guessing every game correctly though are 1 in 542,101,086,000,000,000,192 according to a blog comment here

Ah, Alex. That looks like where it originated from, nice one.

 

This comment below on there must have been written by one of the people who I described earlier as $$$ eyes!

 

One would think that atleast 1 person in the world would be lucky enough. However I would settle for that 1 mil as well (A)

its not the result but your ability to predict it

 

there are 64 world cup games,

 

if you assume you have a 99% chance of getting a single result correct then the probability of getting all the results right is 0.53

 

if you assume you have a 90% chance of getting a single result correct then the probability of getting all the results right is 0.001

Interesting to see the different answers. Not sure I understand this Andy, I'll look again. At first glance, the odds there seem too likely!

Thank god this wasnt asked on the tips thread lol.

:hihi:

 

Probably not a good idea to let me loose in there Corkers.

[CorkerSWFC]

With the responses so far, it seems that as I thought, and pointed out in HeadingNorth's post, that using exact results would be close to filling screens with digits.

 

Ah, Alex. That looks like where it originated from, nice one.

 

This comment below on there must have been written by one of the people who I described earlier as $$$ eyes!

 

 

 

Interesting to see the different answers. Not sure I understand this Andy, I'll look again. At first glance, the odds there seem too likely!

 

:hihi:

 

Probably not a good idea to let me loose in there Corkers.

 

 

Lol Ash m8, your welcome any time pal.

[*_ash_*]

There are sixty-four matches, so the number of possible predictions, if it is win-lose-draw for each match, are three multiplied by itself sixty-four times. (3^64, for mathematical buffs.)

 

My calculator says that this number is 3,433,683,820,292,512,484,657,849,089,281.

 

Your screen must be bigger than my iPhone, I didn't get as many decimal places.. (3.4336838202925e+30)

 

Perhaps this is the nearest 'reasonable' possible calculation. Though it is almost certainly not right. If win-lose-draw is the only aspect of the correct prediction, then this figure doesn't include the possibility of different scores meaning different outcomes from the group stages to the 2nd round [goal difference meaning meeting different opposition in round 2]. With this being the case, I'm still convinced that it is close to numero 'biggest number'.

[discodown]

As it stands its a rip off bet because you don't actually win the cash, what you win is the amount placed in an account with the bookmaker

[*_ash_*]

Lol Ash m8, your welcome any time pal.

 

Hey Corkers, I'll show you a prediction.

 

Click on this and look at the edit, and time of the edit.

 

[*_ash_*]

As it stands its a rip off bet because you don't actually win the cash, what you win is the amount placed in an account with the bookmaker

 

I can't believe anyone would bet on it in the first place!

[Alex C.]

As it stands its a rip off bet because you don't actually win the cash, what you win is the amount placed in an account with the bookmaker

 

And it's at a rate of $2,500,000 per year over 40 years.

[HeadingNorth]

Your screen must be bigger than my iPhone, I didn't get as many decimal places.. (3.4336838202925e+30)

 

Perhaps this is the nearest 'reasonable' possible calculation. Though it is almost certainly not right. If win-lose-draw is the only aspect of the correct prediction, then this figure doesn't include the possibility of different scores meaning different outcomes from the group stages to the 2nd round [goal difference meaning meeting different opposition in round 2]. With this being the case, I'm still convinced that it is close to numero 'biggest number'.

 

I agree with you to some extent; the number I gave is the precise chance of picking the correct choice out of three random ones, 64 times in a row. Given that who plays in the last sixteen matches is dependent on the results of the first 48, if you also have to predict which teams are in them as well as what the results are, then the odds are even more ridiculously impossible than my calculation would suggest.

 

Anyofborg's calculations are (to within rounding-off errors) correct if you understand his basis for calculating them. If you believe that, in each one of the 64 cases, you are 90% likely to make a correct prediction, then there's still only a 0.1% chance of all 64 in a row being correct. If you are so arrogant as to think you have a 99% chance of correctly predicting any football match, you still have barely a 50-50 chance of getting 64 in a row. This is equivalent to rolling a 100-sided dice 64 times and NOT rolling the 00. (I don't think a 100-sided dice exists in reality.)

 

My calculation assumes that all three results are equally likely, and therefore that you have only a 1-in-3 chance of getting any given result correct. In that case, the chance of getting all 64 in a row isn't even worth bothering about.

[*_ash_*]

I agree with you to some extent; the number I gave is the precise chance of picking the correct choice out of three random ones, 64 times in a row. Given that who plays in the last sixteen matches is dependent on the results of the first 48, if you also have to predict which teams are in them as well as what the results are, then the odds are even more ridiculously impossible than my calculation would suggest.

 

Anyofborg's calculations are (to within rounding-off errors) correct if you understand his basis for calculating them. If you believe that, in each one of the 64 cases, you are 90% likely to make a correct prediction, then there's still only a 0.1% chance of all 64 in a row being correct. If you are so arrogant as to think you have a 99% chance of correctly predicting any football match, you still have barely a 50-50 chance of getting 64 in a row. This is equivalent to rolling a 100-sided dice 64 times and NOT rolling the 00. (I don't think a 100-sided dice exists in reality.)

 

My calculation assumes that all three results are equally likely, and therefore that you have only a 1-in-3 chance of getting any given result correct. In that case, the chance of getting all 64 in a row isn't even worth bothering about.

 

Ah, with you now with regards to andys post. There are then, 3 different perspectives to this thread 'odds' idea. Ghozer suggested players and fitness. Andy looks at probability based on choosing likely winners, and yours is based on [probably what I was looking for] which was a definite mathematical probability based on nothing but total number of outcomes.

 

Cheers chaps/esses