Monday, 23 May 2016

9. PEER REVIEWED

So the tipping season that sparked up so well for the FMI system has decayed into chaos and confusion over the last 4 weeks or so. Against all targets,performance is down.

Looking wider, it is not uncommon though.
The Max Barry 'Squiggle' system and FootyForecaster are both tracking at the same as FMI, or 1 point lower.

Its not easy going for the machines, and another 6 this week should have everyone looking again at their models and systems.
PREDICTED RESULTACTUAL RESULTRATINGS ADJUSTMENTS
Hawthornby19ptsSydney/SMFCby14ptsHawthorn-24Sydney/SMFC+14
Geelongby29ptsCollingwoodby24ptsCollingwood+19Geelong-19
Adelaideby35ptsAdelaideby75ptsGold Coast-37Adelaide+14
West Coastby12ptsWest Coastby8ptsPort Adelaide+1West Coast-2
North Melbourneby38ptsNorth Melbourneby67ptsNorth Melbourne+10Carlton-12
Fremantleby8ptsRichmondby38ptsFremantle-26Richmond+16
Melbourneby28ptsMelbourneby60ptsMelbourne+24Brisbane Lions-22
GWSby11ptsGWSby25ptsGWS+33W Bulldogs/FFC-6
St Kildaby10ptsSt Kildaby46ptsSt Kilda+14Essendon-20


Three more dropped this week - Collingwood because... WTF Cats!, Richmond because they are slightly less on the nose than Fremantle, and Sydney because as mentioned recently, the Hawks have dropped over 100 points and are on decline.

West Coast move ahead as the top ranked team as Hawthorn come crashing down around them.
The GWS are really stamping their imprimatur on the season now, climbing up to 6th overall, after starting 12th.
RANKINGSPre:R 10
TEAMPTSΔPTSΔRK
1West Coast1400-1
2Hawthorn1377-23
3Sydney/SMFC134614
4Adelaide130714+1
5Geelong1299-18-1
6GWS125534+2
7North Melbourne125111-1
8W Bulldogs/FFC1231-5-1
9Port Adelaide11631
10Richmond110916
11Collingwood104820+1
12Fremantle1018-25-1
13Melbourne95925
14St Kilda90814
15Carlton855-11
16Gold Coast787-37
17Essendon775-20
18Brisbane Lions757-22

Worrying for the League bosses should be the three teams now sub 800. Both the Queensland clubs and the Dons. All in free-fall.

4 comments:

  1. "Worrying for the League bosses should be the three teams now sub 700."

    Should that not be sub-800, not 700?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, but it still isn't corrected in the article. Good job by the way

      Delete
    2. Errmm thanks again. Reckon I fixed it and didnt SAVE it

      Delete