I truly believe that the NHL is the 4th pro sport in North America because no one new to the sport can figure out the rules due to this kind of bullshit.
PeterB
pedrobo
Endorsed. I’ll defend the Porsche PDK as a track tool to my grave, but for a street car like this I’d also prefer a manual.
You’re talking about the difference between maximizing “run expectancy” and maximizing “win expectancy”. Here’s a win expectancy table that Tom Tango made: http://www.tangotiger.net/welist.html
I don’t understand the rationale of looking at repair cost vs. value, without also considering your alternatives. A 15-20 year old Audi S or Mercedes AMG will be hella pricey to maintain vs. the value, but... they’re also a hell of a lot of car for the price, and the heavy maintenance is why they’re cheap.
I favor a barbell strategy for most purchase decisions, so I’d advocate two cars: Honda Fit for the the street and for hauling things, and NSX for all other uses (assuming we want to stick with one manufacturer for this exercise in minimalism).
I can’t follow this anymore. You seem to be defending the original video by saying that analysis can’t cover every conceivable scenario, which is obviously true. So what is the *specific* conclusion you draw from that obviously true statement?
100% agreed. But that is... analytics. And I assure you baseball teams have both thought about it and analyzed it. Heck, I’ve seen articles about it on Fangraphs.
Btw, my big problem with all of this is that it completely ignores how the other team actually won. Mostly, the Red Sox were lucky of course - in a short series anyone can win. But they made their lineup decisions with... analytics. So if it was bad for the Yankees, why wasn’t it bad for the Sox too?
Um... yes? That’s 100% correct (other than the momentum bit) and in no way suggests teams should rely on feelings over brains just because it’s the postseason.
“But I am certain that it is a possibility and that teams do not dissect down to that level”
I’m saying your entire premise (that there might be an analysis that comes to a certain conclusion in one scenario and a different conclusion in another one) is not a refutation of what analytics departments do and a support of what was said in this clip, it is what they do and entirely in opposition to any assertion…
I mean, there’s just so many paths to finding more speed that you can be a really competitive driver without ever trail braking. At least on many tracks, I think. There are some turns where geometry simply demands that the braking zone extend into the corner (turn 1 at Lime Rock for example). But I digress.
Not just you. :) In addition to the learning aspects of focusing on vehicle dynamics, when you start really working on reducing lap times you will (in general) get much bigger bang for your buck by focusing on maximum exit speed from corners rather than maximum entry speed into them. So trail braking is sort of an…
“Going Faster” has a good detailed discussion of trail braking (and late braking in general) and makes a compelling case that it’s (usually) the last skill you should look to apply for getting better lap times. And I mean “last” literally: not that it should never be done, but that there’s much bigger bang for your…
But if they went to a track they’d get dusted by a better driver in a beat-up ‘92 Miata and their egos couldn’t handle it. Ergo, they must race other jackasses on the street.
For context, the Polaris Ranger starts at $8,999:
Miata, clearly.
Sweet. Sometimes it’s hard to tell on this interweb thing. :)
How can it be both the low percentage play and worth more in the long run? That’s not how probabilities work - the high percentage play in a given situation will always be better in that situation by definition, and thus worth more in the long run.