PRE-GAME [Round 24, 2023] Broncos vs Eels

[I bleed Maroon]

There are a few teams that worry me, and Parra is not one of them.

 

[Big Del]

I think the game against Canberra was a wake up call for this side .
They got bullied that night . Since then when teams have tried that ,they take it up a level , up the tempo and intensity and bully the bullies . They are super fit it seems .

I was critical after the Raiders game and called the Broncos soft , flat track bullies . Well proud to say I was wrong .

 

[Mick_Hancock]

Need to put the cleaners through these pricks. Win by 40 and improve our +/-

 

[Mick_Hancock]

And yes, I know the +/- won’t make much of a difference we’re top 4
But who knows what the Melbourne game brings?! We know the warriors will win all their games

 

[Sproj]

And yes, I know the +/- won’t make much of a difference we’re top 4
But who knows what the Melbourne game brings?! We know the warriors will win all their games

The only way we could possibly be removed from top four is for us to lose every remaining game, Canberra win all remaining games AND overturn a 200 +/-. It is a mathematical impossibility to not make top 4 already.

 

[theshed]

The only way we could possibly be removed from top four is for us to lose every remaining game, Canberra win all remaining games AND overturn a 200 +/-. It is a mathematical impossibility to not make top 4 already.

Says the exact math required for it to occur and then says it’s a mathematical impossibility

 

[Santa]

Says the exact math required for it to occur and then says it’s a mathematical impossibility

From some random maths forum:

A statistical impossibility is a probability that is so low as to not be worthy of mentioning. Sometimes it is quoted as 10−5010−50 although the cutoff is inherently arbitrary. Although not truly impossible the probability is low enough so as to not bear mention in a rational, reasonable argument.

In some cases that arise in Gedanken experiments in thermodynamics, the probabilities can be approximately 10−Avogadro's number10−Avogadro's number, that is, 10−102310−1023, give or take a few billion orders of magnitude.The standard framework of probability theory attempts to assign to each outcome X� a number P(X)�(�) between 00 and 11, which we call the probability of the outcome. The higher the number, the more likely that outcome is to occur. Depending on context, a sufficiently small value of P(X)�(�) will correspond to something being improbable, but there's no inherent threshold between improbable and likely.

General probability theory does not have a good way of making sense of "impossible" or "necessity". Having a probability of 00 does not mean something cannot happen, and having a probability of 11 does not mean that something must happen. To explain this with a metaphor from geometry, consider the notion of area. The area of nothing is 00, but so is the area of a single point. In that sense, the notion of area cannot distinguish between nothing and that which is "infinitely small".

Similarly, when trying to applying probability theory to problems that have infinitely many outcomes, the probability of an event can be zero even if it is possible, so long as there are infinitely many other possibilities that are just as likely (or some similar situation). When it comes down to it, the real number line does not have infinitely small numbers, and since probability theory uses real numbers, these events can only be assigned a probability of 00.

 

[theshed]

From some random maths forum:

A statistical impossibility is a probability that is so low as to not be worthy of mentioning. Sometimes it is quoted as 10−5010−50 although the cutoff is inherently arbitrary. Although not truly impossible the probability is low enough so as to not bear mention in a rational, reasonable argument.

In some cases that arise in Gedanken experiments in thermodynamics, the probabilities can be approximately 10−Avogadro's number10−Avogadro's number, that is, 10−102310−1023, give or take a few billion orders of magnitude.The standard framework of probability theory attempts to assign to each outcome X� a number P(X)�(�) between 00 and 11, which we call the probability of the outcome. The higher the number, the more likely that outcome is to occur. Depending on context, a sufficiently small value of P(X)�(�) will correspond to something being improbable, but there's no inherent threshold between improbable and likely.

General probability theory does not have a good way of making sense of "impossible" or "necessity". Having a probability of 00 does not mean something cannot happen, and having a probability of 11 does not mean that something must happen. To explain this with a metaphor from geometry, consider the notion of area. The area of nothing is 00, but so is the area of a single point. In that sense, the notion of area cannot distinguish between nothing and that which is "infinitely small".

Similarly, when trying to applying probability theory to problems that have infinitely many outcomes, the probability of an event can be zero even if it is possible, so long as there are infinitely many other possibilities that are just as likely (or some similar situation). When it comes down to it, the real number line does not have infinitely small numbers, and since probability theory uses real numbers, these events can only be assigned a probability of 00.

 

[ChewThePhatt]

From some random maths forum:

A statistical impossibility is a probability that is so low as to not be worthy of mentioning. Sometimes it is quoted as 10−5010−50 although the cutoff is inherently arbitrary. Although not truly impossible the probability is low enough so as to not bear mention in a rational, reasonable argument.

In some cases that arise in Gedanken experiments in thermodynamics, the probabilities can be approximately 10−Avogadro's number10−Avogadro's number, that is, 10−102310−1023, give or take a few billion orders of magnitude.The standard framework of probability theory attempts to assign to each outcome X� a number P(X)�(�) between 00 and 11, which we call the probability of the outcome. The higher the number, the more likely that outcome is to occur. Depending on context, a sufficiently small value of P(X)�(�) will correspond to something being improbable, but there's no inherent threshold between improbable and likely.

General probability theory does not have a good way of making sense of "impossible" or "necessity". Having a probability of 00 does not mean something cannot happen, and having a probability of 11 does not mean that something must happen. To explain this with a metaphor from geometry, consider the notion of area. The area of nothing is 00, but so is the area of a single point. In that sense, the notion of area cannot distinguish between nothing and that which is "infinitely small".

Similarly, when trying to applying probability theory to problems that have infinitely many outcomes, the probability of an event can be zero even if it is possible, so long as there are infinitely many other possibilities that are just as likely (or some similar situation). When it comes down to it, the real number line does not have infinitely small numbers, and since probability theory uses real numbers, these events can only be assigned a probability of 00.

 

[Foordy]

From some random maths forum:

A statistical impossibility is a probability that is so low as to not be worthy of mentioning. Sometimes it is quoted as 10−5010−50 although the cutoff is inherently arbitrary. Although not truly impossible the probability is low enough so as to not bear mention in a rational, reasonable argument.

In some cases that arise in Gedanken experiments in thermodynamics, the probabilities can be approximately 10−Avogadro's number10−Avogadro's number, that is, 10−102310−1023, give or take a few billion orders of magnitude.The standard framework of probability theory attempts to assign to each outcome X� a number P(X)�(�) between 00 and 11, which we call the probability of the outcome. The higher the number, the more likely that outcome is to occur. Depending on context, a sufficiently small value of P(X)�(�) will correspond to something being improbable, but there's no inherent threshold between improbable and likely.

General probability theory does not have a good way of making sense of "impossible" or "necessity". Having a probability of 00 does not mean something cannot happen, and having a probability of 11 does not mean that something must happen. To explain this with a metaphor from geometry, consider the notion of area. The area of nothing is 00, but so is the area of a single point. In that sense, the notion of area cannot distinguish between nothing and that which is "infinitely small".

Similarly, when trying to applying probability theory to problems that have infinitely many outcomes, the probability of an event can be zero even if it is possible, so long as there are infinitely many other possibilities that are just as likely (or some similar situation). When it comes down to it, the real number line does not have infinitely small numbers, and since probability theory uses real numbers, these events can only be assigned a probability of 00.

 

[Morepudding]

The fact that the raiders will make the 8, let alone be in contention for top 4 is pathetic. They had the easiest draw of all time and have a huge negative differential. Even against the tigers they only won because of 2 forward passes that went unpunished.

 

[Fozz]

From some random maths forum:

A statistical impossibility is a probability that is so low as to not be worthy of mentioning. Sometimes it is quoted as 10−5010−50 although the cutoff is inherently arbitrary. Although not truly impossible the probability is low enough so as to not bear mention in a rational, reasonable argument.

In some cases that arise in Gedanken experiments in thermodynamics, the probabilities can be approximately 10−Avogadro's number10−Avogadro's number, that is, 10−102310−1023, give or take a few billion orders of magnitude.The standard framework of probability theory attempts to assign to each outcome X� a number P(X)�(�) between 00 and 11, which we call the probability of the outcome. The higher the number, the more likely that outcome is to occur. Depending on context, a sufficiently small value of P(X)�(�) will correspond to something being improbable, but there's no inherent threshold between improbable and likely.

General probability theory does not have a good way of making sense of "impossible" or "necessity". Having a probability of 00 does not mean something cannot happen, and having a probability of 11 does not mean that something must happen. To explain this with a metaphor from geometry, consider the notion of area. The area of nothing is 00, but so is the area of a single point. In that sense, the notion of area cannot distinguish between nothing and that which is "infinitely small".

Similarly, when trying to applying probability theory to problems that have infinitely many outcomes, the probability of an event can be zero even if it is possible, so long as there are infinitely many other possibilities that are just as likely (or some similar situation). When it comes down to it, the real number line does not have infinitely small numbers, and since probability theory uses real numbers, these events can only be assigned a probability of 00.

 

[Super Freak]

And yes, I know the +/- won’t make much of a difference we’re top 4
But who knows what the Melbourne game brings?! We know the warriors will win all their games

I can actually see Warriors dropping a game.

IMO they were lucky to beat Titans. Titans just ran out of gas being down to 12 men for most of the game.

They have Tigers, Manly, Dragons and then Dolphins. A couple of danger games in there for them.

 

[Sproj]

The reality is, the Raiders and Storm have to play each other anyway, so one of them will finish lower than us regardless of other results, so even if we don't win another game due to the bye, we are in the 4.

 

[007]

The reality is, the Raiders and Storm have to play each other anyway, so one of them will finish lower than us regardless of other results, so even if we don't win another game due to the bye, we are in the 4.

Our game against the raiders concerns me more than storm. They can be absolute bullies on their day, i worry about injuries.

 

[Scorchie]

Eels have been a constant thorn in our side in Brisbane for ages.

The side needs to be switched on for this one to avoid an ambush.

Go watch the 2008 match and have a lie down brother

 

[Super Freak]

Go watch the 2008 match and have a lie down brother

Now go watch 2010, 2012, 2014, 2017, 2020, 2021, 2022.

 

[HarryAllan7]

Our game against the raiders concerns me more than storm. They can be absolute bullies on their day, i worry about injuries.

Completely agree... It was the Raiders playing grubby where Reynolds got hurt last year, and that derailed our whole season.

Dogs like Hudson Young build their whole game around trying to niggle, hurt and intimidate much smaller players off the ball (like JWH). I couldn't care less about the result of the Raiders game, I just hope we come out of it with no major injuries.

I hope we use all the remaining games to keep working on / developing things ahead of the finals. Things like Kev use Smoothy more lastweek to get some minutes into his legs, Smoothy running set crash ball plays with Piakura, Piakura getting more minutes in the backrow and Willison continuing to be involved in the middle are all things that will serve us very well come finals time.

Apart from errors and ill discipline, the only weakness of this team is our edge defence, where Cobbo insists on coming flying in off the wing at every opportunity to create huge overlaps... I'd love to see some improvement in this area specifically, otherwise we will get torn to shreds in the finals down that flank by a well-drilled, competent team. It's really our only weakness at the moment.