With that win ratio it's a wonder why you guys ever think you win
Considering the ratio deficit in terms of population, or even registered players... not to mention finances (though I just did) we’re doing aight!
Last edited:
With that win ratio it's a wonder why you guys ever think you win
This sounded interesting, so I had to check it out... Here are the match results along with England's chance of victory implied by the rankings at the time, factoring in home advantage:Interestingly, of the 16 games between Wales and England since 2010, Wales have won six, four of which came when they were ranked lower thank England. So you'd have had more luck predicting a Welsh victory by flipping a coin than using the rankings.
[...]would have achieved the exact same degree of predictive accuracy by simply assuming that England will win every time
The only time the rankings look less than perfect, is in that 2008 game. So... what happened on 2 Feb 2008?![]()
In fact they don't, if you factor in home advantage to the rankings they'd have Ireland, England, New Zealand, SA and Australia all down as favourites to beat Wales at home.But the world rankings (which give a weighting to allow for home advantage) do and they are objective.
In fact they don't, if you factor in home advantage to the rankings they'd have Ireland, England, New Zealand, SA and Australia all down as favourites to beat Wales at home.
England did well in 2015, the our up a fight against wales and Australia. They were always going to be dangerous four years later.I thought the same in 2015....I may have been wrong but I wiped the entire incident from my mind.
yeah England didnt make it to their home World Cup quarterfinals, but they don’t remember so we have to remind them.England didn’t make it to the knock out phase of the last World Cup![]()
it was their first game under warren gatland, warren the maligned by English fans. How appropriateThis sounded interesting, so I had to check it out... Here are the match results along with England's chance of victory implied by the rankings at the time, factoring in home advantage:
(venue is in bold when home advantage means the lower ranked team is favoured. Score is in bold when the winning margin is high enough (15+) to qualify for the 1.5x weighting on Rankings Points won)
England lost 6 13 v Wales Millennium Stadium 17 Aug 2019 - The rankings said: England behind 1.55 RP + 3 HA -> 27% chance
England won 33 19 v Wales Twickenham 11 Aug 2019 - England behind 3.69 RP - 3 HA -> 47% chance [wrong by 3pp]
England lost 13 21 v Wales Millennium Stadium 23 Feb 2019 - England behind 3 HA - 0.47 RP -> 37% chance
England won 12 6 v Wales Twickenham 10 Feb 2018 - England ahead 7.44 RP + 3 HA -> 100% chance
England won 21 16 v Wales Millennium Stadium 11 Feb 2017 - England ahead 7.47 RP - 3 HA -> 72% chance
England won 27 13 v Wales Twickenham 29 May 2016 - England ahead 0.88 RP + 3 HA -> 69% chance
England won 25 21 v Wales Twickenham 12 Mar 2016 - England ahead 3 HA - 1.80 RP -> 56% chance
England lost 25 28 v Wales Twickenham 26 Sep 2015- England ahead 0.41 RP + 3 HA -> 67% chance [wrong by 17pp]
England won 21 16 v Wales Millennium Stadium 6 Feb 2015 - England ahead 3.21 RP - 3 HA -> 51% chance
England won 29 18 v Wales Twickenham 9 Mar 2014 - England ahead 4.86 RP + 3 HA -> 89% chance
England lost 3 30 v Wales Millennium Stadium 16 Mar 2013 - England ahead 3.52 RP - 3 HA -> 53% chance [wrong by 3pp]
England lost 12 19 v Wales Twickenham 25 Feb 2012 - England ahead 0.88 RP + 3 HA -> 69% chance [wrong by 19pp]
England lost 9 19 v Wales Millennium Stadium 13 Aug 2011 - England behind 3 HA - 1.66 RP -> 43% chance
England won 23 19 v Wales Twickenham 6 Aug 2011 - England ahead 2.93 RP + 3 HA -> 80% chance
England won 26 19 v Wales Millennium Stadium 4 Feb 2011 - England ahead 5.44RP - 3 HA -> 62% chance
England won 30 17 v Wales Twickenham 6 Feb 2010 - England ahead 0.83 RP + 3 HA -> 69% chance
Of the last 16 games, if you had flipped a coin you would be right 8/16 times,
if you had bet on England every time you would be right 10/16 times,
if you had bet on the home team every time, you would be right 10/16 times,
if you had bet on the WRR favoured team, you would be right 12/16 times, (including 4/6 where Wales won).
More importantly, the calibration:
- England had an 80-100% implied chance 3 times. You would expect them to win ~90% (i.e. 2.7) of them, they won 3.
- They had a 60-79% implied chance 6 times. You would expect them to win ~70% (i.e. 4.2) of them, they won 4.
- They had a 40-59% implied chance 5 times. You would expect them to win ~50% (i.e. 2.5) of them, they won 3.
- They had a 20-39% implied chance twice. You would expect them to win ~30% (i.e. 0.6) of them, they won 0.
The rankings did a pretty damn good job for those 16 games if you ask me.
Just for curiosity, I went all the way back to the introduction of the WR Rankings:
England lost 15 23 v Wales Millennium Stadium 14 Feb 2009 - England behind 0.93 RP + 3 HA -> 31% chance
England lost 19 26 v Wales Twickenham 2 Feb 2008 - England ahead 11.40 RP + 3 HA -> 100% chance [big stuff up this one!] <<<<<<<<
England won 62 5 v Wales Twickenham 4 Aug 2007 - England ahead 2.73 RP + 3 HA -> 79% chance
England lost 18 27 v Wales Millennium Stadium 17 Mar 2007 - England ahead 3.44 RP - 3 HA -> 52% chance [wrong by 2pp]
England won 47 13 v Wales Twickenham 4 Feb 2006 - England ahead 0.73 RP + 3 HA -> 69% chance
England lost 9 11 v Wales Millennium Stadium 5 Feb 2005 - England ahead 9.68 RP - 3 HA -> 83% chance [wrong by 33pp]
England won 31 21 v Wales Twickenham 20 Mar 2004 - England ahead 15.78 RP + 3 HA -> 100% chance
England won 28 17 v Wales Brisbane 9 Nov 2003 - England ahead 13.32 RP + 0 HA -> 100% chance
Of all 24 games, if you had flipped a coin you would be right 12/24 times,
if you had bet on England every time you would be right 14/24 times,
if you had bet on the home team every game, you would be right 16/23 times,
if you had bet on the WRR favoured team, you would be right 17/24 times.
More importantly, the calibration:
The only time the rankings look less than perfect, is in that 2008 game. So... what happened on 2 Feb 2008?
- England had an 80-100% implied chance 7 times. You would expect them to win ~90% (i.e. 6.3) of them, they won 5.
- They had a 60-79% implied chance 8 times. You would expect them to win ~70% (i.e. 5.6) of them, they won 6.
- They had a 40-59% implied chance 6 times. You would expect them to win ~50% (i.e. 3.0) of them, they won 3.
- They had a 20-39% implied chance 3 times. You would expect them to win ~30% (i.e. 0.9) of them, they won 0.
![]()
Not Brunel's FranceFrance are way better than Argentina.
I think he's just implying that home and away advantage/disadvantage has always been a factor and despite our away form (which is clearly worse than our home) Wales have still managed to reach the number 1 spot.
There are mitigating factors of course... during the run we played our main NH rivals at home and our SH tour was of Argentina... no one is really getting carried away here, I think @tewdric is just using the fact that we are number 1 (for the time being at least) as a bit of leverage for his banter.
Actually I think that the number of home games that Wales get each year is something that many Welsh supporters seem to take for granted. More than 50% of their rugby is played at home. In any year there are 6 to 8 test matches played in the Principality stadium and any rugby fan anywhere in Wales could easily make it to every match if they wanted to. Even driving down from North Wales is just a 4 or 5 hour trip down to Cardiff. Swansea, Newport and other cities are much closer and accessible to/from Cardiff by train.
SH teams by contrast seem to tour/travel more and about 60% of their matches are played abroad. The games that are played at home are then divided amongst several cities: Perth/Brisban/Sydney for Australia, Wellington/Auckland/Christchurch for NZ, Cape Town/Durban/Pretoria etc for SA.
I think that this near constant "home advantage" has been a big factor in Wales recent run of success.
Your somewhat missing the point in so much that home and away is accounted within the rankings formula... therefore you don't actually acquire as many points for a home victory as you would for an away, though you lose more points if you lose at home than you would if you lost away... all adjusted for the ranking of the team that you're playing of course.
Actually I think that the number of home games that Wales get each year is something that many Welsh supporters seem to take for granted. More than 50% of their rugby is played at home. In any year there are 6 to 8 test matches played in the Principality stadium and any rugby fan anywhere in Wales could easily make it to every match if they wanted to. Even driving down from North Wales is just a 4 or 5 hour trip down to Cardiff. Swansea, Newport and other cities are much closer and accessible to/from Cardiff by train.
SH teams by contrast seem to tour/travel more and about 60% of their matches are played abroad. The games that are played at home are then divided amongst several cities: Perth/Brisban/Sydney for Australia, Wellington/Auckland/Christchurch for NZ, Cape Town/Durban/Pretoria etc for SA.
I think that this near constant "home advantage" has been a big factor in Wales recent run of success.
Agreed. 4mths of preparation 3 friendlies lots of blabla yet les Bleus WC hinges on the one (and first) game v Argentina. Lose and they're out.Are they? France had a **** poor 6n this year bar the Scotland game and regularly drop games to T2 nations. That games a dead heat in my opinion, France at their best will win handy but France at their best is a rare thing.
Hmmm...
I just downloaded the calendars for the Pro14 and the Prem for this coming season. The overlap with the RWC is pretty jarring - should I be pessimistic and think, "Well, the first 6 - 8 weeks of those leagues is gonna suck," or go optimistic and think, "What a great opportunity for some of the younger guys to get a chance to shine, and maybe we will discover the next generation of Internationals"?
From what I saw in North Wales, the only rugby they care about is the Gogs anyway. They don't fit in like Ulster does. South Wales? May as well be New South Wales.Not convinced a 4 or 5 hour car journey from North Wales to Cardiff makes it easy to attend every international! A night in a hotel would be a must for one thing which aint cheap on match weekends. Other countries who may be much larger either have far better road/train networks, and will often have the option of internal flights to cut the time down to a fraction of the time. Many away games are easier to attend than driving the length of Wales!
From what I saw in North Wales, the only rugby they care about is the Gogs anyway. They don't fit in like Ulster does. South Wales? May as well be New South Wales.
Any of the Welsh posters on here from the north?
Not convinced a 4 or 5 hour car journey from North Wales to Cardiff makes it easy to attend every international! A night in a hotel would be a must for one thing which aint cheap on match weekends. Other countries who may be much larger either have far better road/train networks, and will often have the option of internal flights to cut the time down to a fraction of the time. Many away games are easier to attend than driving the length of Wales!
Not convinced a 4 or 5 hour car journey from North Wales to Cardiff makes it easy to attend every international! A night in a hotel would be a must for one thing which aint cheap on match weekends. Other countries who may be much larger either have far better road/train networks, and will often have the option of internal flights to cut the time down to a fraction of the time. Many away games are easier to attend than driving the length of Wales!
I think he's just implying that home and away advantage/disadvantage has always been a factor and despite our away form (which is clearly worse than our home) Wales have still managed to reach the number 1 spot.
There are mitigating factors of course... during the run we played our main NH rivals at home and our SH tour was of Argentina... no one is really getting carried away here, I think @tewdric is just using the fact that we are number 1 (for the time being at least) as a bit of leverage for his banter.