<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The West Ham Process &#187; win rate</title>
	<atom:link href="http://westhamprocess.FootballUNITED.com/tag/win-rate/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://westhamprocess.FootballUNITED.com</link>
	<description>Musings in Claret and Blue</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 14:44:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://golbox.com?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>What should have happened? Some interesting stats</title>
		<link>http://westhamprocess.FootballUNITED.com/2009/10/12/what-should-have-happened-some-interesting-stats/</link>
		<comments>http://westhamprocess.FootballUNITED.com/2009/10/12/what-should-have-happened-some-interesting-stats/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 15:32:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sam H</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Musings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fixtures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[football united]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[West Ham]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[win rate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://westhamprocess.com/?p=1992</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#8217;s been easy this year to get dejected about how results have been going. Always on the lookout for the proverbial silver lining, I began wondering how &#8216;history&#8217; suggests we should have been getting on this year. Personally I think it is quite interesting at the very least&#8230;although it certainly doesn&#8217;t excuse the manner of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s been easy this year to get dejected about how results have been going. Always on the lookout for the proverbial silver lining, I began wondering how &#8216;history&#8217; suggests we should have been getting on this year. Personally I think it is quite interesting at the very least&#8230;although it certainly doesn&#8217;t excuse the manner of some results.</p>
<p>I simply looked at the head-to-heads of each of our fixtures thus far (including Cup games), the results are below &#8211; interesting to know what you make of them:</p>
<p><strong>Wolves (Away) &#8211; Won 2-0</strong><br />
Played: 30<br />
Wolves: 14 (46.67%)<br />
West Ham Utd: 10 (33.33%)<br />
Drawn: 6 (20%)</p>
<p><strong>Spurs (Home) &#8211; Lost 2-1<br />
</strong>Played: 66<br />
West Ham: 28 (42.42%)<br />
Spurs: 21 (31.82%)<br />
Drawn: 17 (25.76%)</p>
<p><strong>Millwall (Home) &#8211; Won 3-1 (AET)<br />
</strong>Played: 14<br />
West Ham: 7 (50%)<br />
Millwall: 1 (7.14%)<br />
Drawn: 6 (42.86%)</p>
<p><strong>Blackburn (Away) &#8211; Drew 0-0<br />
</strong>Played: 51<br />
Blackburn: 29 (56.86%)<br />
West Ham: 13 (25.49%)<br />
Drawn: 9 (17.65%)</p>
<p><strong>Wigan (Away) &#8211; Lost 1-0<br />
</strong>Played: 8<br />
Wigan: 2 (25%)<br />
West Ham: 5 (62.5%)<br />
Drawn: 1 (12.5%)</p>
<p><strong>Liverpool (Home) &#8211; Lost 3-2<br />
</strong>Played: 58<br />
West Ham: 20 (34.48%)<br />
Liverpool: 21 (36.21%)<br />
Drawn: 17 (29.31%)</p>
<p><strong>Bolton (Away) &#8211; Lost 3-1 (AET)<br />
</strong>Played: 30<br />
Bolton: 22 (73.33%)<br />
West Ham: 3 (30%)<br />
Drawn: 5 (16.67%)</p>
<p><strong>Man City (Away) &#8211; Lost 3-1<br />
</strong>Played: 46<br />
Man City: 29 (63.04%)<br />
West Ham: 11 (23.91%)<br />
Drawn: 6 (13.04%)</p>
<p><strong>Fulham (Home) &#8211; Drew 2-2<br />
</strong>Played: 41<br />
West Ham: 21 (51.22%)<br />
Fulham: 10 (24.39%)<br />
Drawn: 10 (24.39%)</p>
<p>(<em>stats provided by <a href="http://footballunited.com" target="_blank">FootballUnited.com</a></em>)</p>
<p>Having had a good look at those, of couple of results (and past success rates) particularly stood out &#8211; Bolton, Blackburn and Fulham. Look how poor our win percentage is against Bolton (and also against Blackburn) &#8211; we should stop going to those places expecting them to be opportunities to pick up points because clearly they&#8217;re not. Whereas against Fulham (and I know this is a case of stating the bleeding obvious considering how the game panned out) but we can really view that as points lost.</p>
<p>The summation of those above stats equates to the following averages (don&#8217;t read too much into these as we&#8217;ve not played enough games for them to be entirely statistically significant, but they&#8217;re still interesting!):</p>
<p>In the past against all the teams we&#8217;ve played so far this year, we would have&#8230;</p>
<p>- <strong>Lost </strong>40.49% of the games<br />
- <strong>Won </strong>37.03% of the games<br />
- <strong>Drawn </strong>22.46% of the games</p>
<p>Which, over 9 games works out as:</p>
<p>- <strong>3.64 losses (rounded to 4)<br />
- 3.33 wins (rounded to 3)<br />
- 2.02 draws (rounded to 2)</strong></p>
<p>If you compare that to what we&#8217;ve <em>actually </em>achieved this season <strong>L: 5 W:2 D:2</strong>, it paints a fairly similar picture. In fact, as stupid as it is to say, had we won one more game than we&#8217;d lost we&#8217;d actually be in a position that statistically we could have expected</p>
<p>(<em>NB &#8211; to be taken with a pinch of salt)</em></p>
<p>Anyway, make of it all as you will &#8211; I enjoyed researching for it at the very least!</p>
<p>IRONS</p>
<p>Sam</p>
<p><strong></strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://westhamprocess.FootballUNITED.com/2009/10/12/what-should-have-happened-some-interesting-stats/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

