5 ms·

Oh gawd. Please stop. The Economist is doing it. 538 has done one. Everyone is doing it. They all wind up with similar predictions. Germany, Brazil, France a

by sien 8y ago

Oh gawd. Please stop. The Economist is doing it. 538 has done one. Everyone is doing it. They all wind up with similar predictions. Germany, Brazil, France and Spain are favourites. This is what the betting odds, transfermarkt and the mean salaries of the teams also tell you. There are limits to prediction. The WC is a good place for people to learn that.

vermontdevil 8y ago
For all the hype with World Cup and I love the event, it’s pretty much these 4 (Italy if they qualified) that has won the event. Last time a country outside of the big four(five) is Argentina back in 86 Makes for a bit of a dull ending sometimes.
- paulcole 8y ago
  It's pretty rare that the championship is the best game/series in a tournament/playoffs. Look at the history of Super Bowls, NCAA tournaments, NBA playoffs, etc. More about the journey than the destination.
- sien 8y ago
  The winner for an individual WC is hard to pick and there are usually 4-5 big teams that could win but they have changed a little bit. France hadn't won a WC and kept choking until 1998. Spain were the same until 2010. Italy and Argentina have been in and out of the favourites as well. England were #1 in Elo rankings in the late 1980s and got to the semis in 1990 and were only knocked out with the help of a handball in 1986. With a bit of luck Holland might also have been able to win a WC. Finals in 74, 78 & 2010. But outside a few big teams it is pretty unlikely that there will be a real surprise winner. There are too many big good teams so that one or two surprises isn't enough to win. For example South Korea shocked Italy in 2002 but then Germany beat them. Or Croatia beat Germany in 1998 but then got beaten.
- loblollyboy 8y ago
  Argentina is also part of that top (6) - they’re the Liverpool of international football.
- OscarCunningham 8y ago
  According to Betfair, the probability of one of those teams winning is around 70%. So there's still 30% chance of an upset (most probably from Belgium).
paulcole 8y ago
> the mean salaries of the teams This is new to me. Is the mean salary of a national team predictive? And are you using the mean salary the nation pays or their club salaries?
- heyheyhey 8y ago
  Club salaries.
- avip 8y ago
  It's an established metric that uses club salaries. Is it predictive? The top 4 on that metric are Brazil, Germany, France, Spain.
  - paulcole 8y ago
    Did I miss this year’s World Cup? How can something be predictive for an event that hasn’t happened?
    - profunctor 8y ago
      Weather forecasts predict weather that hasn't happened yet. What is the point in predicting something that has happened?
      - paulcole 8y ago
        I can say it’s going to rain 10 days from now based on whether it’s cloudy today. I wouldn’t say it’s a good prediction until it rains 10 days from now. In other words: how effective has this salary prediction worked out in the past?
- everdev 8y ago
  There's a significant margin of error, but at a high level, the higher someone's salary, the better player you can expect them to be. There are some $10M players who aren't as good as $2M players, but a $30M player is likely considered far superior to a $2M player.
loggedinmyphone 8y ago
People are so impressed now with predictive models based on any kind of correlation. Like: "we predict what kind of wine you will like based on your favorite candy bar" or "how long you'll live based on what you eat for breakfast". Only thing is, it's hard to find any two variables that aren't correlated, to some degree. Actuarial mathematicians have been doing this long enough to know how limited the "predictive power" really is.
everdev 8y ago
My biggest problem with these predictions is retroactive analysis of the prediction itself. If I have Brazil at a 99% chance to win the WC and they win, is my model the best? I guess the idea is that over time, you measure prediction performance, but models are constantly changing and there's enough time in between WC tournaments that it'll take at least a century to have a good sample size of predictions. If you take something more immediate like predicting tomorrow's stock prices or even the market (up/down), I wonder how their prediction models would fare.
- jamesrom 8y ago
  Yep, using many predictions you can calculate a 'brier score' which is a measure of your predictive performance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brier_score https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brier_score See also: https://predictionbook.com https://predictionbook.com

by sien 8y ago

vermontdevil 8y ago

For all the hype with World Cup and I love the event, it’s pretty much these 4 (Italy if they qualified) that has won the event. Last time a country outside of the big four(five) is Argentina back in 86 Makes for a bit of a dull ending sometimes.

paulcole 8y ago
It's pretty rare that the championship is the best game/series in a tournament/playoffs. Look at the history of Super Bowls, NCAA tournaments, NBA playoffs, etc. More about the journey than the destination.
sien 8y ago
The winner for an individual WC is hard to pick and there are usually 4-5 big teams that could win but they have changed a little bit. France hadn't won a WC and kept choking until 1998. Spain were the same until 2010. Italy and Argentina have been in and out of the favourites as well. England were #1 in Elo rankings in the late 1980s and got to the semis in 1990 and were only knocked out with the help of a handball in 1986. With a bit of luck Holland might also have been able to win a WC. Finals in 74, 78 & 2010. But outside a few big teams it is pretty unlikely that there will be a real surprise winner. There are too many big good teams so that one or two surprises isn't enough to win. For example South Korea shocked Italy in 2002 but then Germany beat them. Or Croatia beat Germany in 1998 but then got beaten.
loblollyboy 8y ago
Argentina is also part of that top (6) - they’re the Liverpool of international football.
OscarCunningham 8y ago
According to Betfair, the probability of one of those teams winning is around 70%. So there's still 30% chance of an upset (most probably from Belgium).

paulcole 8y ago

> the mean salaries of the teams This is new to me. Is the mean salary of a national team predictive? And are you using the mean salary the nation pays or their club salaries?

heyheyhey 8y ago
Club salaries.
avip 8y ago
It's an established metric that uses club salaries. Is it predictive? The top 4 on that metric are Brazil, Germany, France, Spain.
- paulcole 8y ago
  Did I miss this year’s World Cup? How can something be predictive for an event that hasn’t happened?
  - profunctor 8y ago
    Weather forecasts predict weather that hasn't happened yet. What is the point in predicting something that has happened?
    - paulcole 8y ago
      I can say it’s going to rain 10 days from now based on whether it’s cloudy today. I wouldn’t say it’s a good prediction until it rains 10 days from now. In other words: how effective has this salary prediction worked out in the past?
everdev 8y ago
There's a significant margin of error, but at a high level, the higher someone's salary, the better player you can expect them to be. There are some $10M players who aren't as good as $2M players, but a $30M player is likely considered far superior to a $2M player.

loggedinmyphone 8y ago

People are so impressed now with predictive models based on any kind of correlation. Like: "we predict what kind of wine you will like based on your favorite candy bar" or "how long you'll live based on what you eat for breakfast". Only thing is, it's hard to find any two variables that aren't correlated, to some degree. Actuarial mathematicians have been doing this long enough to know how limited the "predictive power" really is.

everdev 8y ago

My biggest problem with these predictions is retroactive analysis of the prediction itself. If I have Brazil at a 99% chance to win the WC and they win, is my model the best? I guess the idea is that over time, you measure prediction performance, but models are constantly changing and there's enough time in between WC tournaments that it'll take at least a century to have a good sample size of predictions. If you take something more immediate like predicting tomorrow's stock prices or even the market (up/down), I wonder how their prediction models would fare.

jamesrom 8y ago
Yep, using many predictions you can calculate a 'brier score' which is a measure of your predictive performance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brier_score https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brier_score See also: https://predictionbook.com https://predictionbook.com