|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1411
|
|||
|
|||
700/23 vs 700/25 tires ?
In article ,
John Forrest Tomlinson wrote: On Sat, 07 Mar 2009 11:49:46 -0600, Tim McNamara wrote: OK, then. Prove it. You keep making these assertions without backing them up with any facts. Provide us with facts. Your continual "is too" approach is not convincing. Chung provided stats. Sandy provided stats on power and tires. And Ben also provided calculations. All helpful in advancing the discussion. You've pretty much just provided dudgeon. The closest "proof" I can provide is practice -- what is done. By thousands of people. Billions of people believe in one or more invisible cosmic friends. Does that make them right? Do you apply the same sort of skeptism in other aspects of your life? I try to, at least where evidence exists. I try to differentiate between faith and knowledge. For something you don't have data on but the vast majority of people do it one way that's differen than, say, 25 years ago, and you keep doing it the old way just because of the lack of non-experiential evidence? Really? Oddly enough, bike racing isn't very different than it was 25 years ago. Training methods are somewhat different (way better drugs, for one thing) and equipment is a little different in design but fundamentally the same in function (due to UCI rules, to a great extent). |
Ads |
#1412
|
|||
|
|||
700/23 vs 700/25 tires ?
In article ,
Michael Press wrote: In article , Tim McNamara wrote: It's all stochastic, man. No, it is not. Ooh, nice comeback. I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm convinced now. Now perhaps you might insert an illuminating fact here. |
#1413
|
|||
|
|||
700/23 vs 700/25 tires ?
In article ,
Tim McNamara wrote: In article , Michael Press wrote: In article , Tim McNamara wrote: It's all stochastic, man. No, it is not. Ooh, nice comeback. I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm convinced now. Now perhaps you might insert an illuminating fact here. It is not all stochastic. Fact. -- Michael Press |
#1414
|
|||
|
|||
700/23 vs 700/25 tires ?
Tim McNamara wrote:
[...] Billions of people believe in one or more invisible cosmic friends. Does that make them right? [...] Only those who believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster creating the Universe with His Noodly Appendage. -- Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007 LOCAL CACTUS EATS CYCLIST - datakoll |
#1415
|
|||
|
|||
700/23 vs 700/25 tires ?
On Mar 5, 7:18*pm, Tim McNamara wrote:
" wrote: On Mar 3, 5:40*pm, Tim McNamara wrote: Greg has only three other competitors in his class? *That's the only way he'd have a 25% chance of winning each race. This is statistically illiterate. *You believe a version of the RBR joke that whenever there are two outcomes, the chances are always 50/50. Chance *is* 50/50 when there are only two possible outcomes. No it isn't. This is innumeracy. I might win the lottery tomorrow. Or I might not. There are two possible outcomes. Are the chances 50/50 ? I could arm wrestle Chuck Norris. One of us is going to win. Would you put even odds on me? You are restating a common misconception - that probabilities of outcomes must necessarily be uniform. In fact everyone knows this is not the case; Joe Average is perfectly capable of understanding the spread on football games. One could imagine that in a given race, there's 2 racers with a 25% chance of winning, 2 with a 10% change, 4 with a 5% chance, 10 with a 1% chance, and 10 with no chance at all. This is far closer to the reality I've seen than everyone having an equal chance. And how do you determine those chances? *Of course, you're actually attempting to talk about probabilities in a monobuttocked way. The exact numbers don't matter. * ????? *I see- if the proposal is sufficiently imprecise it can be bent to support your position. No. I put some concrete numbers in the example so you can follow along, because this is simple math. Then you whine. I could choose different concrete numbers and the principles would remain the same. If I tried to write all these statements about probability down in a general algebraic form, it would be hard to read in ASCII usenet, and you wouldn't be able to follow as well because it would be abstract rather than a concrete example. Unless you can come up with your own concrete numerical counterexample, quit bitching. All I am saying is that there are effects that would be considered significant but cannot be demonstrated at 3 sigma because the sample size of one season is too small. An improvement in winning chance from 5 to 10%, or 25 to 35%, is like that. If you have experience in outcome-based health care assessment, you should understand this principle. It may take a trial with hundreds of people to determine that a procedure works, because the improvement that it makes is not decisive (e.g. it doesn't save everybody's life). However, _for each individual person_, the additional chance of a positive outcome is important, so if the cost/benefit of the procedure is good, it is indicated. Even though you may not be able to later determine that the additional procedure is what made the difference for an individual patient. That is, you may know that 10 out of 100 patients were helped, but you don't know which ones. If you don't understand this, take a refresher class. Seriously. Ben |
#1416
|
|||
|
|||
700/23 vs 700/25 tires ?
On Mar 6, 9:23*am, Tim McNamara wrote:
In article , *John Forrest Tomlinson wrote: On Thu, 05 Mar 2009 20:20:04 -0600, Tim McNamara wrote: Of those 2000+ races, how many more did you win because of that 1% improvement that you wouldn't have won otherwise? *And how do you know it was *that* 1% improvement? it can't be known with certainty because races are too complex. * What Ben has shown us is that it can't be known if the effect size of the improvement is smaller than the error of measurement. *This is a well-known problem in statistics and is a good working definition of negligibility. All I showed is that Frank's proposed experiment had too small a sample size to detect a reasonable effect. That is not a good working definition of "negligible" because it depends on sample size. Bret's 2000 races would be a somewhat better sample size, but there is no way to control an experiment retroactively. If there was some small change - for example, maybe he trained smarter than everyone else all those years - that allowed him to increase his winning chance by 1%, though, that would be 20 races, which most would not consider negligible. Another example: the house in casino gambling typically has an advantage of just a few percent in any given bet (for many casino games, not slots). If you didn't know this, and placed 10 or 20 bets, you'd win close to half, and lose close to half. You wouldn't be able to tell that the house had an advantage. Does this mean that the house's advantage is negligible? In the long run, over many bets and many bettors, the house does not think so. Of course, if all you ever do in the casino is make 10 small bets and then leave, maybe you don't care that the house is taking a little from you on average. Cheap entertainment and all that. But if you care about winning, or losing as slowly as possible to prolong the entertainment, then you might care about small differences in the odds. Casinos have better odds than state lotteries; blackjack has better odds than roulette; both have better odds than slots. There are entire websites devoted to this, so somebody doesn't think it's negligible. Ben |
#1417
|
|||
|
|||
700/23 vs 700/25 tires ?
On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 22:18:33 -0500, Tim McNamara
wrote: In article , John Forrest Tomlinson wrote: For something you don't have data on but the vast majority of people do it one way that's differen than, say, 25 years ago, and you keep doing it the old way just because of the lack of non-experiential evidence? Really? Oddly enough, bike racing isn't very different than it was 25 years ago. Training methods are somewhat different (way better drugs, for one thing) and equipment is a little different in design but fundamentally the same in function (due to UCI rules, to a great extent). It's interesting how you throw up stuff like this. Has anyone here said bikes are "fundamentally" different? You're like Frank K, "arguing" that fast bikes are very important in recreational rides. Also interesting that you don't answer my question, which is not about fundamental differences, but small differences. |
#1418
|
|||
|
|||
700/23 vs 700/25 tires ?
On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 22:18:33 -0500, Tim McNamara
wrote: Billions of people believe in one or more invisible cosmic friends. Does that make them right? Oh yeah, because many people overestimate the effect of bikes, therefore bikes don't have much effect at all. The reactionarism of RBT is always amusing. |
#1419
|
|||
|
|||
700/23 vs 700/25 tires ?
On 9 Mar, 01:40, Tom Sherman wrote:
wrote: On Mar 6, 7:55 pm, Tom Sherman wrote: "jeffreybike" wrote: Is there any real difference between 23mm and 25mm tires as far as speed. Will 2mm make you that slower or faster? thanks, Jeff Should have skipped the thanks, since no good answer has been provided as of yet. Bad questions reap a bountiful harvest of bad answers, and predicating it on a false dichotomy is like slowly moving upstream with a long line of hooks out. The answer is 35. No, it is 42. -- Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007 LOCAL CACTUS EATS CYCLIST - datakoll 23 + 19 tyre or 24+18 spokes TJ |
#1420
|
|||
|
|||
700/23 vs 700/25 tires ?
Nick L Plate aka Trevor Jeffrey wrote:
On 9 Mar, 01:40, Tom Sherman wrote: wrote: On Mar 6, 7:55 pm, Tom Sherman wrote: "jeffreybike" wrote: Is there any real difference between 23mm and 25mm tires as far as speed. Will 2mm make you that slower or faster? thanks, Jeff Should have skipped the thanks, since no good answer has been provided as of yet. Bad questions reap a bountiful harvest of bad answers, and predicating it on a false dichotomy is like slowly moving upstream with a long line of hooks out. The answer is 35. No, it is 42. Please honor the signature separator (i.e. "-- "). 23 + 19 tyre or 24+18 spokes Do not throw the letter Q in a privet bush, or we will never find out. -- Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007 LOCAL CACTUS EATS CYCLIST - datakoll |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: Tires T-Mobile Continental GP 3000 Tires | Scott Morrison | Marketplace | 1 | August 29th 07 10:59 PM |
Order a pair of tires or 3 tires? | RS | Techniques | 12 | July 12th 06 06:40 PM |
Wide Mt. Bike Tires vs. Thin Tires | [email protected] | Mountain Biking | 17 | April 12th 05 06:13 AM |
relative cost/usage between bicycle tires and automobile tires | Anonymous | Techniques | 46 | April 7th 04 07:03 PM |
23c or 25c tires | kpros | Techniques | 30 | March 12th 04 03:59 AM |