And the Winner is . . . Geeks, Statisticians, and Pollsters

Forum guidelines BT super discount
Other Resources My Cup of Joe » And the Winner is . . . Geeks, Statisticians, and Pollsters Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, the bear, DerekL, alicefoeller Reply
2012-11-06 10:59 PM

User image

Veteran
582
500252525
Golden, CO
Subject: And the Winner is . . . Geeks, Statisticians, and Pollsters
Three cheers for Sam Wang, Nate Silver and Drew Linzer. These guys nailed the election. Math and science 1, pundits and political strategists, 0

2012-11-06 11:04 PM
in reply to: #4487247

User image

Elite
4547
2000200050025
Subject: RE: And the Winner is . . . Geeks, Statisticians, and Pollsters

3 cheers for the country!  (I love science and math!  Take that pundits!)

2012-11-07 1:01 AM
in reply to: #4487247

User image

Veteran
334
10010010025
Tacoma, Washington
Subject: RE: And the Winner is . . . Geeks, Statisticians, and Pollsters
Nate Silver is my hero   I hope this puts a lid on this pundit crap but I doubt it.
2012-11-07 7:31 AM
in reply to: #4487247

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: And the Winner is . . . Geeks, Statisticians, and Pollsters
moneyman - 2012-11-06 10:59 PMThree cheers for Sam Wang, Nate Silver and Drew Linzer. These guys nailed the election. Math and science 1, pundits and political strategists, 0
True that. I admittedly fell for the spin. I feel like i got duped and Im not very happy about it. Fool me once...
2012-11-08 12:14 PM
in reply to: #4487247

User image

Master
2802
2000500100100100
Minnetonka, Minnesota
Bronze member
Subject: RE: And the Winner is . . . Geeks, Statisticians, and Pollsters

Agreed!  My post in the last prediction poll was "In Nate Silver I trust".

Interestingly, I am on a project at work trying to build a prediction model around data with a non-normal distribution.  Fun in a totally geeky sorta way!

2012-11-08 12:55 PM
in reply to: #4489947

User image

Veteran
582
500252525
Golden, CO
Subject: RE: And the Winner is . . . Geeks, Statisticians, and Pollsters
ejshowers - 2012-11-08 11:14 AM

Agreed!  My post in the last prediction poll was "In Nate Silver I trust".

Interestingly, I am on a project at work trying to build a prediction model around data with a non-normal distribution.  Fun in a totally geeky sorta way!

If you like Silver, in the next go around, you should check out Sam Wang's Princeton Election Consortium.  Silver writes a lot more, but Wang has been at least as accurate, and maybe more so

I am investor/money manager - I spend my life trying to building a prediction model around data with a non-normal distribution.

2012-11-08 4:08 PM
in reply to: #4487247

User image

over a barrier
Subject: RE: And the Winner is . . . Geeks, Statisticians, and Pollsters
2013-02-09 10:12 AM
in reply to: #4490553

User image

Champion
6056
500010002525
Menomonee Falls, WI
Subject: RE: And the Winner is . . . Geeks, Statisticians, and Pollsters
Maybe Nate Silver should stick to elections.

Or maybe he's just plain wrong as often as he's right. Like a chimp throwing darts at a board.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2013/01/nate-silver-ca...

2013-02-09 10:43 AM
in reply to: #4487247

User image

Elite
4547
2000200050025
Subject: RE: And the Winner is . . . Geeks, Statisticians, and Pollsters

Yes, like a chimp throwing darts at a dartboard.  Sports prognostication is a lot different than political polling science.    

I've got an "outside of the box" idea for the G.O.P. come 2016.  When the pollsters come a-callin' in 2015 and 2016, just lie.  Tell them you're voting Democrat.  Let the Democrats believe they have a 9 to 1 edge in "the polls."  Make a concerted effort to muddy the waters...it would be the perfect deflection once the inevitably bad numbers start to mount up.  It's about the only way I can see a party successfully "throw out the poll #'s."  (that's a quote Sean Hannity was using a lot as the 2012 election was drawing near..."don't believe the liberal polls" was another common refrain of the Fox News pundits).  

2013-02-09 4:12 PM
in reply to: #4615613

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: And the Winner is . . . Geeks, Statisticians, and Pollsters
scoobysdad - 2013-02-09 10:12 AM

Maybe Nate Silver should stick to elections.

Or maybe he's just plain wrong as often as he's right. Like a chimp throwing darts at a board.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2013/01/nate-silver-ca...



LOL. The first line of the article you posted is:

"Nate Silver has made a life for himself by predicting things. He is not bad at it, either. He is right more often than he is wrong, except when it comes to football. "

I bet Fox News wishes they had had something as statistically accurate as chimps with dartboards in their newsroom.
2013-02-09 5:18 PM
in reply to: #4615850

User image

Champion
6056
500010002525
Menomonee Falls, WI
Subject: RE: And the Winner is . . . Geeks, Statisticians, and Pollsters
jmk-brooklyn - 2013-02-09 4:12 PM

scoobysdad - 2013-02-09 10:12 AM

Maybe Nate Silver should stick to elections.

Or maybe he's just plain wrong as often as he's right. Like a chimp throwing darts at a board.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2013/01/nate-silver-ca...



LOL. The first line of the article you posted is:

"Nate Silver has made a life for himself by predicting things. He is not bad at it, either. He is right more often than he is wrong, except when it comes to football. "

I bet Fox News wishes they had had something as statistically accurate as chimps with dartboards in their newsroom.


LOL. And the first line of my post reads: Maybe Nate Silver should stick to elections.

Apparently, his magic touch doesn't extend to the NFL, for all those who hailed him as some Nostradamus-like genius. Yeah, I dare say, my dog could have predicted the playoffs more accurately.



2013-02-09 5:45 PM
in reply to: #4615894

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: And the Winner is . . . Geeks, Statisticians, and Pollsters
scoobysdad - 2013-02-09 5:18 PM

jmk-brooklyn - 2013-02-09 4:12 PM

scoobysdad - 2013-02-09 10:12 AM

Maybe Nate Silver should stick to elections.

Or maybe he's just plain wrong as often as he's right. Like a chimp throwing darts at a board.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2013/01/nate-silver-ca...



LOL. The first line of the article you posted is:

"Nate Silver has made a life for himself by predicting things. He is not bad at it, either. He is right more often than he is wrong, except when it comes to football. "

I bet Fox News wishes they had had something as statistically accurate as chimps with dartboards in their newsroom.


LOL. And the first line of my post reads: Maybe Nate Silver should stick to elections.


And the second one is "Or maybe he's just plain wrong as often as he's right. Like a chimp throwing darts at a board." Or did your dog write that?
2013-02-09 6:08 PM
in reply to: #4615916

User image

Champion
6056
500010002525
Menomonee Falls, WI
Subject: RE: And the Winner is . . . Geeks, Statisticians, and Pollsters
jmk-brooklyn - 2013-02-09 5:45 PM

scoobysdad - 2013-02-09 5:18 PM

jmk-brooklyn - 2013-02-09 4:12 PM

scoobysdad - 2013-02-09 10:12 AM

Maybe Nate Silver should stick to elections.

Or maybe he's just plain wrong as often as he's right. Like a chimp throwing darts at a board.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2013/01/nate-silver-ca...



LOL. The first line of the article you posted is:

"Nate Silver has made a life for himself by predicting things. He is not bad at it, either. He is right more often than he is wrong, except when it comes to football. "

I bet Fox News wishes they had had something as statistically accurate as chimps with dartboards in their newsroom.


LOL. And the first line of my post reads: Maybe Nate Silver should stick to elections.


And the second one is "Or maybe he's just plain wrong as often as he's right. Like a chimp throwing darts at a board." Or did your dog write that?



Or maybe he just gets more publicity when he's right. He wasn't just wrong in predicting this year's NFL playoffs, he wasn't even close. Funny, I didn't see many articles about that, either.

I'd love to see an analysis of the accuracy of his predictions when the outcome is at all in doubt-- not when the odds were considerably stacked in his favor as they were in the past three US national elections (he's also been spectacularly wrong, like in the 2010 UK General Election.)

Until then, in Dog I trust.



2013-02-09 7:00 PM
in reply to: #4615930

User image

Veteran
582
500252525
Golden, CO
Subject: RE: And the Winner is . . . Geeks, Statisticians, and Pollsters

scoobysdad - 2013-02-09 5:08 PM
jmk-brooklyn - 2013-02-09 5:45 PM
scoobysdad - 2013-02-09 5:18 PM
jmk-brooklyn - 2013-02-09 4:12 PM
scoobysdad - 2013-02-09 10:12 AM Maybe Nate Silver should stick to elections. Or maybe he's just plain wrong as often as he's right. Like a chimp throwing darts at a board. http://www.theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2013/01/nate-silver-ca...
LOL. The first line of the article you posted is: "Nate Silver has made a life for himself by predicting things. He is not bad at it, either. He is right more often than he is wrong, except when it comes to football. " I bet Fox News wishes they had had something as statistically accurate as chimps with dartboards in their newsroom.
LOL. And the first line of my post reads: Maybe Nate Silver should stick to elections.
And the second one is "Or maybe he's just plain wrong as often as he's right. Like a chimp throwing darts at a board." Or did your dog write that?
Or maybe he just gets more publicity when he's right. He wasn't just wrong in predicting this year's NFL playoffs, he wasn't even close. Funny, I didn't see many articles about that, either. I'd love to see an analysis of the accuracy of his predictions when the outcome is at all in doubt-- not when the odds were considerably stacked in his favor as they were in the past three US national elections (he's also been spectacularly wrong, like in the 2010 UK General Election.) Until then, in Dog I trust.

The election wasn't in doubt?  Only if you listened to Nate Silver.  Fox news and all the pundits said otherwise.

His work on the election wasn't so much a prediction as it was an evaluation of the data and a conclusion that the polls, in the aggregate, are generally right.

I would love to see more data on his sports prediction model.  The outcome of a few games is meaningless statistically.  If he were right 60% of the time, you could make a fortune

 

 

New Thread
Other Resources My Cup of Joe » And the Winner is . . . Geeks, Statisticians, and Pollsters Rss Feed