🤣

No, it's purely random. :-)

Oh right! 😅

Pure chance 😁

A bit like the mdm xD

Well, in any case, if there's a team playing away, there's bound to be one playing at home, so the 50/50 seems a bit inevitable^^.

Those who are complaining about their ratio this season must not have looked at it in other seasons... And maybe they have a toenail that grows faster than the same toe on the other foot, they should check.

That's the problem with making "probabilities" on a small scale. On a panel of 100 matches already, you can find variations of 10-20% depending on the season, by agreement (the number of home matches per season varies between 40-60% in general). So on a panel of 10-20 matches, it's not impossible to find variations ranging from 20% to 80% of matches at home. But the main thing is that over many more games, everything will balance out.

If we take a slightly larger sample (those in the top 6, and the lower agreements in D1 with 60 matches already scheduled) over the current season alone :

LV: 35/69 (50.72%)
LR: 32/55 (58.18%)
CP: 31/53 (58.49%)
Circle: 23/60 (38.33%)
RTG: 27/62 (43.55%)
LGM: 32/54 (59.26%)
Team Bourgogne: 37/67 (55.22%)
L'entente languedocienne: 24/66 (36.36%) (potentially slightly underestimated due to a lack of tags and therefore visibility)

We can see what I was saying above, with "big" inequalities at the start of the season depending on the agreement. But if we add them up to arrive at a larger scale :
Ndomicile = 35+32+31+23+27+32+31 = 211
Ntot = 69+55+53+60+62+54+67 = 420
NDomicile / Ntot = 211/420 = .... 50.238095238%
With 420 matches, taking only 8 of the 16 D1 agreements, we can see that it seems to be 50-50 between home and away.

Conclusion: Never draw conclusions based on a small sample when you want to highlight trends of this kind (especially when you have the possibility of using large samples).

Not true.

no I accepted and I play away

#match?mid=6488852

Contradictors of what exactly?
Hazard's theory or your answer?

The arguments are simple: those who do IE have already seen it... It's not because you make a request that it puts you on the outside, de facto.
At worst, if you don't believe it, try? Try asking even 5 questions and you'll see. And if you fail even once, you'll have your answer.
But I'm telling you, if you want to save time, you're on the wrong track with this statement.

Think about it Michbou, if everyone who made the request automatically played at home, don't you think everyone would just make a request and no one would accept a match?

As far as I'm concerned, you're just speculating, mainly because the data we can see doesn't allow us to validate or refute this hypothesis. You'd have to do the same large-scale analysis as above, but not by agreement, just by 2 groups:

• Home vs away matches of those making the request (figures not known)
• Home vs away match of those accepting the request (figures not known)

Theoretically, for 10,000 matches, we should obtain 2,500 matches for each of the four options, i.e. :
=> Players making the request (if the ratio is 50-50) :
2,500 home
2,500 away

=> Players who have accepted the request (if the ratio is 50-50) :
2500 home
2500 away

And secondly, what would be the point of modifying the code for the random 50-50 allocation proba created for the other match/competition modules depending on who makes the request, and the competition mode you're in? It would require a bit more work for the MDJ, for an illogical purpose.

On the other hand, it's easy to get a biased statistical impression on a small scale (10-50 matches), which is where this speculation comes from.

I'm doing probabilities on a sample of 420 matches. You're doing probabilities on a sample of 23. When you don't know how to handle statistics and probabilities, sometimes it's better not to say anything.

And as far as "a single season" is concerned, we all know that A45 has no business changing its home/away allocation algorithm every season, which would make it impossible to produce statistics for a single season, even with 1,000 games... That said, it is possible, and that's the limit of my analysis above.

But frankly, when you don't know a thing, sometimes it's better to keep a low profile, listen and study to get a feel for the subject.

You were luckier when it came to drawing your opponents, without wishing to insult the others, but apart from Skyz 2 times, Estac 2 times and Jex 1 time, the other 19 matches were ones where you were favourites and clearly within your reach.
But as far as I'm concerned, your bad luck in playing away from home was offset by the adversity of your IE's.

Tkt I'm looking more with you CP 😉
I'll go and discuss it on discord. You will still have the conversation since you put a mole among the lv 😉
Good day CPs 😀

it's going to be difficult to do anything more balanced than 34/69.
The current IE mechanism means that there is no automatic recalculation to balance by manager. That said, brewen's average per agreement shows that within a single agreement, on the whole, you can't complain too much, even if there are occasional discrepancies.

So, if for you what's important is the balance per manager, we can understand that, but you won't win your case and frankly, you're denouncing a false problem.

At least you understood what I meant, my friend.
Because I'm talking about my case where it's really an imbalance over several seasons.

If you have 4 seasons in a row with a 60% home advantage, your chances are still good?

That doesn't change the fact that even if we were at 51%, for me that's not equal. I don't think they'd be as happy as you'd like them to think.

There's no such thing as an agreement that has 40% every season, after a while it's bound to tend towards 50%, it's the law of large numbers.

Since we're talking about it again, why don't you find me a 50 50 over several seasons 😉
I'll stop here.
Bon jeux à tous

Nobody's saying it's going to be 50/50, if that's what you want to play with. Then you know an average is..... An average. It's incredible, I know. And what's even more unbelievable is that you could potentially have an agreement that will have 60% at home in season X and 40% at home in season Y. The principle of an average. It balances out over the seasons and if you don't know that, too bad for you. We shouldn't talk about isolated cases, but rather about a group. An agreement, you see.

I've got proof because I'm 19 out of 23 outdoors, so I'd like to see other proof over 4 seasons. In short, there's no point, it'll be a never-ending subject.

Unfortunately, you're the one who's creating an endless topic where almost everyone has already ended it since the start of the discussion in order to imply that the matchmaking system is deliberately privileging people. (There are indeed privileged players, but they are randomly selected over a short period of 10 to 30 matches).

You say that you've had 19 away draws for 4 home draws, all over 4 seasons. So you're questioning the randomness of the 50-50, on the basis that 23 draws are sufficient proof, and that the seasons are a possible bias that needs to be taken into account.

To illustrate your reasoning, it would be like saying that if I toss a coin (heads or tails, to illustrate 50-50), I could prove that 50-50 is false if I did 6 tosses on 4 consecutive days of the week, and in the end, I got heads 19 times and tails 4 times out of the whole thing. Would that make sense to you?

Not for me. Quite simply, 23 throws aren't enough to represent what Galy linked to, i.e. the 50-50 probability. If you did 100 throws over those 4 days, you'd get results closer to 50-50. Or 6 throws over 50 days. In any case, it's not the number of throws you make per day, or the weather at the time of the toss that will influence the results, but rather the number of iterations to best represent the Heads versus Tails proba defined in your population (which will also allow you to see whether the coin is more or less rigged). In this case, your 4 seasons excuse is similar to the days of the week that would influence the probability of the coin flipping heads or tails. If the probability of getting Heads (home match) or Tails (away match) is not modified/ruined day after day (season after season), then the main parameter that matters is the number of coin tosses (number of scheduled matches) to highlight the 50-50 distribution.

I couldn't explain the situation any clearer, I hope it helps you understand. :)