Hopmans' opponent analysis

I would like to discuss one final issue:
Getting results. In the end it's all about winning the big matches. Whether it is a match for the EU.1 title or a WC semi final. Those matches need to be won. In the previous seasons those matches we choked. The nickname of WC chokers isnt't giving to us by our adversaries because we used to rule them. It's given to us because we lose too many matches at times when it mattered.

How am i going to curb the bad streak of results?
I've discussed Which results i got, player analysis, Talent program and ways on how the NT can be more helpful for the English managers. This entry will be about opponent analysis.

Most managers at low level club check the top3 or top5 players of a squad and assess whether they can beat them. Don't ever do that again! You need the information on the whole squad, not just pieces. I try to use every bit of information the site provides in order to make an assessment.
First i don't just look at top15 CSR players and compare them. That wouldn't tell me much.

I've compiled a list so i can compare all teams in England. This way i can compare values not only against my team but also every other team of similar CSR levels.I look at the following parameters: Top10CSR, Top22CSR, TeamCSR, age, salary and their standard deviations. When comparing Top10 with each other you get a basic idea about their first15. When comparing their Top10 Top22 differences and my team's Top10 Top22 differences you will see whether they are declining badly if their best players won't play. And you can crosscheck teamCSR with top22CSr of both his and my team that will give you a basic figure on how the second team will perform.

The standard deviation will tell me if they are playing with 1 or 2 top-class players and the rest mediocre. Or that the team is well balanced. The first example will be easier to beat then the latter. So CSR doesnt tell the whole picture. You will have to watch for the spread of CSR as well.

And for all out there who were waiting for one, i can't end these without posting, of course, a screenpic. http://postimg.org/image/rjcf34qxh/
And then to believe i've got all the countries of Br like this.

CSR is useless.

Why wouldn't you use their match statistics instead? That's the real key to telling how a team is playing and what tactics they tend to veer towards. Even reporter ratings are a much more useful tool than CSR.

I like the idea of using salary in conjunction with CSR, as like Ted I've not a lot of faith in CSR, but how does you model fair as the season progresses? I'd expect it to worsen as one heads into the latter stages and those possible big WC matches, as some of the input is now degraded in quality.

I also got one for the national teams and -20.
Once you got one all you got to do in input the team id (well slightly more work for NT, but not much more work).

It's API based. I can make a new one by pressing a button. No deterioration takes place.

BTW i agree with the limitations on CSR. I just feel every edge should be examined. With CSR i hold a large margin of error. And salary is also looked at in much the same manner as shown in the pic.

Either the model is a good one and works, and then as the salary input degrades with training affecting the quality of the salary input it worsens, or the model is no use and/or stating the bleedin' obvious.

Salary is constant from R1 to R16, so making a new API will not alter that factor.

oh you meant the salary component. All salary based analysis will have this problem. No opponent will have that data. So it's a level playing field as far as salary will go.

The CSR however can be renewed when possible. I dont like to go by CSR alone myself. And i won't when the really big close matches are due. What this program is good at is checking whether there is room to save some energy for later or not. Mistakes like the Canadian match won't occur. I have never had a unpredicted result with this program. This program, alongside other, is the reason i get my good results in eu.2 and the win against Italy and the tie against France.

I think your campaign here is ending on a much stronger footing than it got off to, for whatever reason, and that's a good thing.

I'd be interested to see some predictions made with the models this coming season. And I'd also be interested to see you have another run at the England NT job next time around if Wing wins tomorrow.

prediction for the english league isnt that much exciting. I think everybody will come down to the same conclusion.
Its going to be bromborough with a expensive team. He oisnt certain of winning every match though. But an attack on Bromborough during the league can be costly, so are the teams going to risk it? Bromborough will probably go into the play-offs with a lot of energy.

For the cup though:
It's a toss-up between Bromborough and Batlin' Weasels. I don't know much about both manager abilities. (i focused on the abilities of the NT's these seasons). Those teams are way too close to call. The only real difference is the number of players. This will probably mean that the weasels will save up 70.000 each week compared to Brom but Brom will have better energy going into The latter stages. The weasels have the benefit of having an easier league

to be honest tangy, i'm waiting for the results of the election prior to making a decision. I got 2 invitations from respected managers to move to their countries. If i lose the election than the first thing i do i get some rest from BR and get some sleep. It's been a busy week for me, with ups and downs.

I got some invitations but i think i will stick with England. if they don't want me at all then thats fair than i will build up Holland. If the result is close i might take an other shot at England -20 next season.

I've got a number of votes in my head that i at least need to get if i want to run again.

I was thinking more some predictions on EU.1 for the various squad permutations.

i could do that. But not without handing every opponent of England the same data. If i analyze our opponents i have to name their strengths and weaknesses. Other countries will exploit that as well. There's a reason i didn't use England as an example for analysis.

I'll send you a igm shortly.

How much work do you do on match day tactics? With the Netherlands you were in the fortunate position of not being expected to win, so when you do it's great, with England you would be in the position of being expected to win every single match.

Does your program account for the future? You may be able to pick the best squad to beat Ireland, but what of Scotland in 2 days time? And the Italians a week later etc etc.

In the case of this WC, whilst a different squad may well have been able to compete with Canada and beat them, what then with Scotland? Would we have simply taken a single step further forward to still not win a WC?

With the new changes to zonal tactics, it may be that picking a squad out of the 30 (which are becoming more and more equally matched) is the easiest part of the equation.

Obviously no one can really make a claim to have mastered these zonal tactics yet, but I wonder if they will be far more important than knowing what your best side is.

Well the program is the tool. In the end it comes down to the managers decisions. The programs tell me who i am able to beat while on WNWIM or with the second XV. Even with England no manager can guarantee a WC win. You have to have the luck of the draw as well.

Even in EU.1 you wont win them all. I plan ahead 3-4 matches if i hit something that wasnt expected i make new plans.

I didnt expect to win my first eu.2 match Netherlands (WNWIM) - Wales (normal). But when i did i let go of my conservative planning and went for it. It paid off.

the big problem Wing had created for himself was finishing 5th in EU.1 that meant a strong EE.1 opponent and likely a strong opponent in the top16 match.

If Wing finished 1st-4th he would have drawn a lesser EE.1 or Strong E.2 team as his biggest rival i the pool. and then he could have saved energy for a long WC bout.

In my eyes Whenever we hit team like South Africa France and Scotland back to back. England isnt going to have energy left for another one. So a terrible draw alone can ruin ones WC aspirations. But at least you have to beat the first 2 you hit.

Player selection is easy, put a lock there, a center there and you're done. At the highest level, that of NT, knowledge about tactics decide the winner. What are the limit to stay in? When are you taking risks? I think i got a solid base to work from and that we all can bring glory to England.

Finishing top of your pool gives you a strong or weak opponent in the top 16, not your seeding.

Canada is a weak top 16 opponent, and the squad used against Canada was not the squad used against SA. A team going LTNT in the 2nd pool round will be virtually fully recovered by the quarter finals. And whilst it's easy to say after the event that SA weren't going to compete, if you look at the 2 sides of the competition, it was very clear finishing 1st in the pool was far more preferable than going normal and maybe not getting the win.

So player selection is easy, meaning your tools are perhaps not of so much use for a side such as England, where it's obvious in every match that we should be competitive. We don't need a program to tell us that we can make a competitive team.

I'd like to see your tools in action (though I don't know how much used they'd be, it could be fun to see), and to work alongside whoever the new manager is (I'm assuming it'll be wing, who knows, you ight take it ).

I do want England to run trials with the new tactics, because a few smart assistants now could really make a huge difference, but I believe it'll be scouting opposition tactics, and see what works for our own side, as opposed to squad selections that'll be important.

You skipped past my point of finishing 1st-4th in Eu.1. If wing did that. (which isnt by far the hardest thing to do) he wouldnt have South africa in the pool stage. England didnt need to waste energy in the pool because they needed to become first. they needed to waste the energy because they didnt had a good seeding spot to begin with (finishing 5th in Eu.1)

1st would have seen us getting ahead of Scotland (not easy) and facing PI. Fair enough, that would have been doable. But be aware, it's not easy for England to win the league, in the past there have been intensity agreements between other nations just so that they can stop England winning the league.

2nd would have seen us against Canada, and we've seen what happens there now. So still needing an LTNT from a strong squad.

3rd, we'd have been against Zim, who really would have loved to have had a go against us, LTNT needed.

4th would have seen us against the USA, who almost beat Italy on an intensity level lower...

Finishing 5th was no worse than finishing 2-4th. In some ways it was better, since it guaranteed we'd only need to WNWIM the first and last games, whereas there's no guarantee that some of the better minnows wouldn't have a go at us.

good analysis. The thing of course. Would the top16 opponent still TNT england when England finished i.e. There are crazy NT managers out there so it could be. But England looked weak after letting 4 out of his 5 opponents in eu.1 finish in front of him. And the rats smelled blood. We need to prevent this in the future.

England can finish first and every one of those mentioned would have a LTNT at us. People went for me when I had the toughest u20s squad out there, and had won 3/4 league titles even after LTNTing for more than 28 of the league games. There is no point England can be to stop opponents LTNTing us if they think that can win LTNT vs WNWIM. That's something you'll need to learn .

to learn? Thats why i wrote the programs, mate. you can calculate so that 99 out of a 100 times you will win against weaker opponents. Whithout losing too much energy. But at least make sure you win them. If at the end of the line The energy runs out. Than at least we will be 2nd or 3rd at a WC. not a plate final loser.

I mean learn that everyone comes at England, regardless of how strong we look.

yeah that of course is a problem. But there isnt really anything we can do about it other than building monsters of players and i think my talent program combined with the log will ensure that those beasts will be built so the rats won't feast of our blood again.