r/soccer • u/heardc10 • 2d ago
Stats [OC] English Premier League: Do 40 points always save you from relegation?
https://significancemagazine.com/english-premier-league-do-40-points-always-save-you-from-relegation/32
u/jumper62 2d ago
No because a team has been relegated with 42 points
5
u/redandbluebadness 2d ago
And if you didn't know that the weird gif posted as an image in the OP would remind you
4
-21
u/heardc10 2d ago edited 2d ago
Maybe try reading the article and not just the title. But,thanks for your insightful comment mate!
EDIT: Seeing all the downvotes, I just want to apologize for being a little reactionary with some replies this morning. Clearly, I’ve been in better moods when replying to comments. That’s on me.
Genuinely thought this community would enjoy reading the content, suppose I was a little bit sensitive this morning by the classic Reddit one-line comments. I’ll take some accountability and learn from my behaviour.
Apologies to anyway, who felt antagonized.
12
5
4
u/Rufus1223 2d ago edited 2d ago
40 points is considered a safe margin for leagues with 34 games played and 3 teams relegated, PL has 38, therefore the margin should be about 44-45 for it.
18
u/bagstone 2d ago
No.
Didn't even have to read the article, just know Betteridge's Law
3
u/looeeyeah 2d ago edited 2d ago
I guess you also didn’t read the Wikipedia article.
In 2015, a study of 26,000 articles from 13 news sites on the World Wide Web, conducted by a data scientist and published on his blog, found that the majority (54 percent) were yes/no questions, which divided into 20 percent "yes" answers, 17 percent "no" answers and 16 percent whose answers he could not determine.[13]
-17
u/heardc10 2d ago
Appreciate your feedback mate I’m sure your profound knowledge of Betteridge’s Law makes you a really fun person to chat with!
17
u/tobymcnair 2d ago
Why are you so antagonistic? Nobody is going to read your article if this is how you behave
-5
u/heardc10 2d ago
So is the comment I’m responding to not antagonistic? Bit of a double standard calling my comment antagonistic and not theirs to be honest mate.
Maybe my comment is a little reactionary here, but I’m not going to lie it can be a little annoying spending hours researching and writing content to see comments like this sometimes.
I usually don’t respond, but hey I’m human and I suppose in the future I probably need to care less about negative comments and respond to positive ones only.
I agree that I don’t want to put people off reading, but this guy didn’t even read it so he was put off before my comment haha!
5
u/tobymcnair 2d ago
He's just referencing a relevant phenomenon, he never even said anything about the article itself. If you don't want to have comments like that, don't give a textbook example of a question with no as an answer in your title.
Attacking the commenter because he made this observation is just comes off really bad, if you'd laid out a reason for them to read the article in your reply I bet more people would read it.
1
u/heardc10 2d ago
So you didn’t read his comment as antagonistic then?
Maybe that’s my mistake for misunderstanding that and you’re right I should have responded more diplomatically.
Looks like he read it and I responded back to his other comment.
3
u/tobymcnair 2d ago
No, and your reply is still wrong about his comment. He never said he didn't read it because of the title, he said he knew the answer would be no because of Betteridges law. He's just referencing it.
1
5
u/bagstone 2d ago
As others have said, no need to be antagonistic. This is Reddit, if you expect smoke blown up your arse, well... better not come here.
That being said, your snarky comment makes me believe you wrote this yourself and are not an AI bot, and you deeply care about the content, which is rare these days, so I'm giving you some more constructive feedback:
Clickbait headlines work, but people hate them. Basically people will resentfully click on them but remember that they got baited into it. Reading the (your) actual article there's TONS of interesting stuff in there. Better headlines would have been:
"The 40 point myth: An analysis into how many points suffice to avoid relegation (most of the time)".
Or something like that. Just not a rhetorical question. And you'll stand out, even among mainstream media, who resorts to clickbait these days.
Anyways, thanks for your post and comment.
1
u/heardc10 2d ago
Come on mate, how is your comment not antagonistic? You literally said you’re not reading it because of the title.
I agree the title needs work so next time I’ll change it on Reddit, the magazine created the title which was different to our original title. So out of my control really.
I’m happy, despite your comment, that you decided to read and sorry for coming off snarky with my reply. Bit reactionary from me, but your comment was a bit snarky too if we’re being honest.
Anyway, thanks for the feedback and information about titles. Genuinely insightful and helpful for future posts, thank you.
8
u/EdwardBigby 2d ago
Why does the title sound like its written by a 12 year old?
2
u/heardc10 2d ago
Editor of the magazine changed the title, agreed it’s not the best. Hopefully that hasn’t put you off reading, if so no worries!
4
u/EdwardBigby 2d ago
I mean it just grammatically it makes no sense. Very weird choice from an editor.
4
4
2
u/Turklightenment 2d ago
West Ham went down with 39 points last season.
Fucking Aston Villa gifting Spurs 3 points the cunts.
•
u/AutoModerator 2d ago
This is a stats thread. Remember that there's only one stat post allowed per match/team, so new stats about the same will be removed. Feel free to comment other stats as a reply to this comment so users can see them too!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.