n********r
发帖数: 4558 | 1 2005 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
2006 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
2007 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
2008 RG Nadal 3:0 Federer - Nadal won Wimbly
2010 RG Nadal 3:0 whoever - Nadal won Wimbly
2011 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF win Wimbly, no? |
e******r
发帖数: 327 | |
K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 3 This one is a little bit stretchy, more like 赚取眼球。
e.g., FF won 2005 and 2006 Wimby has almost nothing to do with
Nadal's FO. 相关系数接近0。
Year 2009 was missing, while 2010 is listed.
The only 靠铺 years are 2007, 2008. Just twice.
【在 n********r 的大作中提到】
: 2005 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
: 2006 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
: 2007 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
: 2008 RG Nadal 3:0 Federer - Nadal won Wimbly
: 2010 RG Nadal 3:0 whoever - Nadal won Wimbly
: 2011 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF win Wimbly, no?
|
t****7
发帖数: 11132 | 4 Conclusion: Nadal vs History, no?
【在 n********r 的大作中提到】
: 2005 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
: 2006 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
: 2007 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
: 2008 RG Nadal 3:0 Federer - Nadal won Wimbly
: 2010 RG Nadal 3:0 whoever - Nadal won Wimbly
: 2011 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF win Wimbly, no?
|
n********r
发帖数: 4558 | 5 Don't jump to conclusion too fast.
Correlation depends on how you present the data, e.g,
2005 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
2006 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
2007 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
2008 RG Nadal 3:0 Federer - FF did not win Wimbly
2010 RG Nadal 3:0 whoever - FF did not win Wimbly
2011 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF win Wimbly, no?
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: This one is a little bit stretchy, more like 赚取眼球。
: e.g., FF won 2005 and 2006 Wimby has almost nothing to do with
: Nadal's FO. 相关系数接近0。
: Year 2009 was missing, while 2010 is listed.
: The only 靠铺 years are 2007, 2008. Just twice.
|
d**f
发帖数: 293 | 6 very scientific. I love it :)
【在 n********r 的大作中提到】
: Don't jump to conclusion too fast.
: Correlation depends on how you present the data, e.g,
: 2005 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
: 2006 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
: 2007 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
: 2008 RG Nadal 3:0 Federer - FF did not win Wimbly
: 2010 RG Nadal 3:0 whoever - FF did not win Wimbly
: 2011 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF win Wimbly, no?
|
b**k
发帖数: 11850 | 7 who's whoever?
【在 n********r 的大作中提到】
: 2005 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
: 2006 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
: 2007 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
: 2008 RG Nadal 3:0 Federer - Nadal won Wimbly
: 2010 RG Nadal 3:0 whoever - Nadal won Wimbly
: 2011 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF win Wimbly, no?
|
w********r
发帖数: 1397 | 8 Birdman.
【在 b**k 的大作中提到】
: who's whoever?
|
K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 9 I don't see any essential difference.
As I said, it's a good way to present the data, but I wouldn't
bet my money on conclusions drawn from a presentation.
To me, 2007 and 2008 are statistically significant. The others,
close to random.
For example, FF would have won 2005 and 2006, no matter what
Nadal did in the FO those two years. FF was invincible. FF would
not have won 2010, no matter what Nadal did in FO that year. FF
was too weak and Nadal was too strong...
【在 n********r 的大作中提到】
: Don't jump to conclusion too fast.
: Correlation depends on how you present the data, e.g,
: 2005 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
: 2006 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
: 2007 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF won Wimbly
: 2008 RG Nadal 3:0 Federer - FF did not win Wimbly
: 2010 RG Nadal 3:0 whoever - FF did not win Wimbly
: 2011 RG Nadal 3:1 Federer - FF win Wimbly, no?
|
b**********s
发帖数: 9531 | 10 it's better lz put real money to bet on FF, then let's what happens. |
d******n
发帖数: 12850 | 11 soderling
【在 w********r 的大作中提到】
: Birdman.
|
B****n
发帖数: 11290 | 12 也不是沒有參考價值 至少說明了一些兩週前兩人的狀態對比 還是對預測溫布頓有
參考價值的
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: This one is a little bit stretchy, more like 赚取眼球。
: e.g., FF won 2005 and 2006 Wimby has almost nothing to do with
: Nadal's FO. 相关系数接近0。
: Year 2009 was missing, while 2010 is listed.
: The only 靠铺 years are 2007, 2008. Just twice.
|
n*********e
发帖数: 25274 | |
