- Joined
- May 25, 2007
- Messages
- 5,708
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
OK, I know he does physics...
The won't do him much good.. the formulae are Statistical!
OK, I know he does physics...
The won't do him much good.. the formulae are Statistical!
Lol.... I don't know if you're taking the **** or what...
This is what you said. "I don't think either the Chiefs or Crusaders will beat the Stormers in South Africa"
You gave me a definition of "favorite" yet that isn't even the word you used in the sentence that started this exchange.Perhaps if you had used it, your point would be valid.
That doesn't suggest the game can go either way.
It doesn't suggest the Stormers are merely favorites but the Chiefs/Crusaders could possibly win.
The only thing that sentence suggests is that you don't believe the Chiefs or Crusaders will beat the Stormers in South Africa and that's pretty much it.
There is no difference between "I think the Stormers are favorites" and "I don't think the Chiefs/Crusaders will win".
The favourite by definition is: "the competitor thought most likely to win a game or contest, especially by people betting on the outcome."
Therefore stating "I think the Stormers are favourites" and "I think the Stormers will win" is saying exactly the same thing. Stating "I think the Stormers will win" is exactly the same as stating "I don't think the Crusaders/Chiefs will win". Therefore simple algebra tells us that "I think the Stormers are favourites" is the same as "I don't think the Crusaders/Chiefs will win"
Unfortunately for you, they don't mean exactly the same thing.I gave you a definition of favourite to show that the statements "I think the Stormers are favourites" and "I don't think the Chiefs/Crusaders will beat the Stormers" mean exactly the same thing!
Let me make it simplerLet me make it simple:
I think the Stormers will beat the Crusaders/Chiefs.
Therefore, I think the Stormers are favourites. Stormers are favourites but that doesn't mean you don't count the Crusaders/Chiefs out.
Therefore, I don't think the Crusaders/Chiefs are favourites. Stormers are favourites but that doesn't mean you don't count the Crusaders/Chiefs out.
Therefore, I don't think the Crusaders/Chiefs will beat the Stormers. You don't think the Chiefs/Crusaders will beat the Stormers at all.
Which of the above statements do you disagree with?
The bold part is key: "I think the Sormers will win" means, quite simply, that I think the Stormers will win
"The Stormers are favourites" means that the bettors, as a whole, on average if you will, think the Stormers will win.
So we have a difference between what I think and what the aggregate of bettors thinks.
So then when I say "I think the Stormers are favourites" it means that I think that the bettors, as a whole, think that the Stormers will win.
Now, I might disagree with the bettors as a whole; I might think the opposite of what they think.
Therefore, the statements "I think the Stormers will win" and "I think the Stormers are favourites" are NOT equivalent.
The first sentence is only about what I think. The second sentence is about what I think other people think.
Unfortunately for you, they don't mean exactly the same thing.
Let me make it simpler
Again I come back to, if it was worded correctly, the confusion wouldn't have emerged.
And my prediction on the game, The Sharks to win by 12!
Yes, technically you are correct if you consider the term "favourites" to refer solely to what bettors as a whole think. However I think it is perfectly acceptable to use the term favourites to solely refer to who you think is most likely to win. For any specific event there could be an number of "favourites" - e.g. a "bookies favourite" (who the bookies think will win), a "public favourite" (who the general public think will win), and "personal favourite" (who you personally think will win). I suppose it is my own fault for choosing a definition for favourite that included "especially by people betting on the outcome" - I probably should have stuck with the following definition: "favourite - a competitor thought likely to win"...
In any case this isn't really relevant. The main point is that stating that I don't think the Crusaders/Chiefs will win is not the same thing as stating the Crusaders/Chiefs have no chance of winning!
You are seriously suggesting that stating that "I think 'team x' are favourites" is different than stating "I think 'team x' will win"?
Instead of just stating "they are not the same", you will have to explain to my why they are not the same! Stating you think a team will win does not mean you think the opposition has no chance I'm sure every week you will say something like "I think the Hurricanes will beat the Highlanders" - I'm sure you don't think that implies that the Highlanders have no chance....
There was nothing wrong with my original wording - the fact you (twice) thought that "I don't think the Crusaders/Chiefs will beat the Stormers" is the same as stating "I think the Crusaders/Chiefs have no chance against the Stormers" is really beyond my control
Hahahaha Ok you've convinced me on this alone!!
+rep
That's just fine. You all talk about anything you like right up to the point the Stormers take the ***le. Then i will make damn sure the Stormers are all anyboy's talking about whether you find it tedious or not.
If we don't win I suppose I will have to find a way to travel to a dimension where we did take the ***le because that would be easier than waiting another year without silverware (I don't count the Vodacom- and SR conference cups).
looks like someone struck a nerve somewhere...
It would be nice if the Stormers finally had a trophy of value in their cabinet, so that Newlands can finally appoint a cleaner and buy some Mr. Min...
on that note, renew the contract with your cleaner and buy in bulk as it seems the Bulls are some distance away from even smelling the silverware again
2001... The year I left high-school.... Man, that's a while ago!
I can't believe 2001 was 11 years ago!
If someone says something was a decado ago to me, I still think late 90's.