That's assuming you think Ghana won't show up against Portugal. They might not have much reason to play by that point, facing Germany next...but who knows
Lol 2 penalties, let´s not exaggerate. It´s not like Brazil does not have players who can score through individual effort, as seen with Neymar and Oscar in the first game (of course there was a foul right before Oscar´s goal but still...).
How is it bullshit? You are such a troll
Russia is way overrated. I'll take the South Korea to win there. Heavy wins for Belgium and Brazil are on the cards, of course.
Because there's no way that a win agianst Ghana raises the probability to qualify a 30 % (nor that you had 1/3 chances to qualify to begin with). If you had defeated Germany how much it would had raised, 3000 %?How is it bullshit? You are such a troll
I didn't really look at the math, but the fact that Portugal has a -4 goal differential after one game has to factor into the chances of everyone else in the group.
Because matches are not decided by numbers, the prediction ignores the human factor. In terms of elections, there are at least polls and trends published pretty frequently before an election which makes such a prediction easier than predicting a form of team on the match day or the compatibility of two oppenents, not to forget that those SPIs are just estimations in the first place and can easily be changed based on view and opinion. Finally, just based on the SPIs of the teams estimated by ESPN, there were more than a few miscalculations so far, for example Australia being more than equal to Chile, or Nigeria tieing with Iran or Netherlands crushing Spain, or Costa Rica embarrassing Uruguay like that, or Ecuador losing to Switzerland, or Italy winning against England, or the hilarity of England, Uruguay, Colombia, Chile, Bosnia all having a higher rates than Italy while more than a few weaker countries have almost an equal rate.Full breakdown of US odds to advance and all potential scenarios.
How is it bullshit? You are such a troll
The guy correctly predicted the winner in all 50 states before the 2012 Presidential election, along with 31 out of 33 Senatorial races. Drawing odds on a few soccer matches is not that hard, in comparison. What factual argument can you make against a mathematical model of the probability (not a prediction, the probability) to win, to back up your little claim of "bullshit"? Calling something "bullshit" is pretty fucking easy, and intellectually cheap. Don't just throw around pejoratives, back it up.
I saw people referencing the report, but I didn't actually check it out. It's because Portugal has a -4 GD and, as long as the US gets at least a draw against Portugal, barring Portugal utterly smashing Ghana and the US conceding massive numbers to Germany (you'll need to have a 6 goal turn around), the US is effectively through to the group stages.
I know
I know, but you really believe that Portugal won't play better against you or that they can't get that 6 goals difference (which is huge, but still)? Even with all that, I don't see you having better chances than them, and it's obvious why.
Pepe, Coentrao, and Almeida might all be out for that match. I'm not saying Portugal can't make up that difference, but it'll get larger unless Portugal curbstomps us and Ghana, which is kind of doubtful given the injury news. They might perform well considering the circumstances, but stomps? Doubt it.
So you're just going to ignore the circumstances completely and say Portugal > USA? Wow, I can do that easily too!Easy to say that, but I don't see that happenning. As long as we win every match, I'd say our chances of being champions are pretty good
Well, as long as it's a better team... yes?So you're just going to ignore the circumstances completely and say Portugal > USA? Wow, I can do that easily too!
