This is the clearest statement on what you are doing with Cassi, I think I have read, Keith.
My thinking is: how do you help the human feel like they maintain agency on decisions, rather than blame the predictions ("It was 80% certain. What would you have done!?!").
The weather provides a great analogy because I know many get frustrated when it is only 20% chance off rain - AND THEN IT RAINS!
P.S. What are Newcastle's chances of winning their next game now that Anthony Gordon seems to be off to Barca..?
On your 80% point - people do that anyway “the game was lost, what was the point?” The probabilities are just implicit - and the argument here is clearer: the game wasn’t lost or the goal unobtainable, there was a 20% chance. The question should be: what could I have done, or would you have done, to move the odds? Now you are having precisely the conversation Cassi was designed to prompt, showing you the best path to your goal, enabling you to optimise for its achievement.
On the weather - yes, it rains 20% of the time. You get to decide if the risk was worth it. 80% of the time it doesn’t rain, and you don’t notice the risk you ran nor question your judgement. The risk was still there, and your judgement - if your goal is to never get rained on without an umbrella, flawed.
Newcastle/Anthony Gordon - you tell me. What do the bookmakers say? Their job, like ours at Cassi* is to price possible futures in probabilities. Presumably Eddie Howe has looked, probabilistically, at the trade-offs - how much playing without Anthony Gordon reduces his p-win per match, and how much being able to spend the transfer fee on X, Y, or X will offset that. If you are a Newcastle fan, you better hope he is a good forecaster. Or you could encourage him to buy an Enterprise licence for Cassi and take Moneyball to the next level.
*as was ours as former IntOs, we just hid the probabilities in narrative advice.
This is the clearest statement on what you are doing with Cassi, I think I have read, Keith.
My thinking is: how do you help the human feel like they maintain agency on decisions, rather than blame the predictions ("It was 80% certain. What would you have done!?!").
The weather provides a great analogy because I know many get frustrated when it is only 20% chance off rain - AND THEN IT RAINS!
P.S. What are Newcastle's chances of winning their next game now that Anthony Gordon seems to be off to Barca..?
Morning Tim - and thank you!
On your 80% point - people do that anyway “the game was lost, what was the point?” The probabilities are just implicit - and the argument here is clearer: the game wasn’t lost or the goal unobtainable, there was a 20% chance. The question should be: what could I have done, or would you have done, to move the odds? Now you are having precisely the conversation Cassi was designed to prompt, showing you the best path to your goal, enabling you to optimise for its achievement.
On the weather - yes, it rains 20% of the time. You get to decide if the risk was worth it. 80% of the time it doesn’t rain, and you don’t notice the risk you ran nor question your judgement. The risk was still there, and your judgement - if your goal is to never get rained on without an umbrella, flawed.
Newcastle/Anthony Gordon - you tell me. What do the bookmakers say? Their job, like ours at Cassi* is to price possible futures in probabilities. Presumably Eddie Howe has looked, probabilistically, at the trade-offs - how much playing without Anthony Gordon reduces his p-win per match, and how much being able to spend the transfer fee on X, Y, or X will offset that. If you are a Newcastle fan, you better hope he is a good forecaster. Or you could encourage him to buy an Enterprise licence for Cassi and take Moneyball to the next level.
*as was ours as former IntOs, we just hid the probabilities in narrative advice.
I think from what I have seen it is about transfer market and making the most of leverage from his contract to 2030.
That said, I CANNOT BELIEVE that you used football and DIDN'T discuss Arsenal's game on Saturday...