“As usual, my opponent benefits from vastly superior dice.

Most of the first half is consumed in a score exchange. There is still time, though not much, for me to score, but I fail a 8/9 block and go down. He is then able to rush in and scoop up the ball, but I knock him down and time runs out.

In the second half, it really reaches an absurd level. On the initial kick off he scores easily, as with his high move and AGI he is able to throw a safe pass and score quickly. Then, on the kick off, he gets an incredibly lucky blitz that leaves him in an excellent position to score. He has two people close to the ball. I knock one down and push him into the ball in the hopes that it will scatter out. However, it goes to the one square with his guy, who then scoops it up in two tackle zones. After that there isn't much I can do and he scores easily.

On the next drive I am pretty likely to score, but then I fail my 5/6 pick up and the ball scatters out (of course) and then gets thrown by the crowd away from my players but near his. He scoops it up and scores for the fourth time.

Surprisingly, despite all the games Qaz has played, he still believes that the "luck" meter is an accurate display of how fortunate you've been, but that isn't true. For one thing, kick off chart results (which all benefited him to the tune of a re-roll, get the ref, and blitz) don't change it. Additionally, luck only measures success. If you do actions that are likely to succeed, you have high luck. Since I only act when I am very likely to succeed (5/6 or 8/9) you would expect high luck. In fact, since the vast majority of my actions are 5/6 or 8/9, statistically you would expect a luck result somewhat higher than 84%. That I manage only 62% shows how screwed I get.

The reality is that without the blitz and if I'd managed to pick up the ball (5/6) or it didn't scatter out (5/8) or it had been thrown to me (1/3) or it hadn't gone so far (12/36 = 1/3) this game would have been the 2-2 tie it was shaping up to be.

This mathematical essay wouldn't be necessary if people realized more about what the luck meter means and how it works.


--- Response ---

5 Cas seems quite impressive, until you realize that most of them came from DP fouls. That I caused more casualties than you isn't surprising given that I threw twice as many blocks, had more players, and was able to foul with more assists. In fact, what is surprising about the casualties isn't how many I caused, but how well you did.

It takes a pretty bizarre read on the game to believe you can score with 7 players and still shoulder the bad luck. Yes you managed to hit me (at less) with your strip ball guy, but again, you didn't get the ball, and I failed a 5/6 pick up and then it scattered out to where only you could get it? Would you like a math lesson on how unlikely that is?

Admittedly, you did position your players very well, and on the whole I was fairly lucky with OFAB. Not with how often I got it, because it hosed me quite a few times, and even failing with RR. Rather, it was fortunate that I did not inflict a lasting injury on a thrall.

You need to learn a lot more about how the luck meter works before you use it as a proposition that you in fact had worse luck, a claim you made in game. You need to learn a lot more about math if you are going to assert that your strip ball block at less was anything other than a desperation plan that worked, and you need to learn a lot more about statistics if you are going to claim that managing three more scores with an ever diminishing player count owes nothing to either awesome rolls, or poor opponent rolls, or both.

Obviously you are a skilled player, and I salute the way you were able to take advantage of the turns that went your way. It is undeniable that once you managed to get the ball, you engineered creative plans, like after the blitz when your block managed to push your ball carrier free. In general your play was very good, but scoring four times in any game requires a lot of lucky opportunities. To have gotten them and then close your eyes and claim that the shakes were even is just self-denial.”