Profile of The_Riddler

Why would I weight in every single match both of there countries have ever played? How do the results that Pele's team had help forecast events in 2014?

I agree that recent result (Like games that will be played during the tournament) can be used to assess potential match winners, but that's not really a statical analysis. Recent results are a reflection of teams current form which I'm suggesting is the most important factor for match prediction.

Clearly, matches played roughly 50 years ago barely weigh in. Nonetheless, there are various rationales behind incorporating those matches. For instance, the home advantage of a given country is partially based on every single historical result. Why? Because the home advantage significantly affects the outcome of a given match, whereby the pattern of home advantage over time indirectly assesses the support of a given country. For instance, a home crowd of 60,000 might affect the outcome to a higher degree when compared to a home crowd of 20,000, where a Brazilian home crowd possibly affects the outcome to a higher degree in comparison to an Algerian home crowd, et cetera.

People do mention the weather conditions a lot for this WC. If it affect the players as much as they say, teams such as Spain who prefer the passing game could gain a significant advantage within the 70-90min mark if they have been forcing the opposition chasing after the ball throughout the game.

This is a common misconception, as statistics show that there is no significant difference in distance covered between offensive teams and defensive teams. Personally, I think that has to do with the way defensive teams fall back to 30/40 meters, effectively decreasing the distance between defenders and strikers, benefiting midfielders as well. For instance, Mourinho's Porto, Inter Milan, Chelsea and to a lesser extent Real Madrid, have all used this tactic successfully, without increasing the average distance covered.

Im up for it, ready to let my emotion go wild .

It starts Thursday by the way, so that gives you an additional day.

In sports, past events have no effect on future results. Had 2010 been anywhere in the world Spain still would have won.

I did not just provide that statistic, I also mentioned several reasons for the excistence of that particular statistic. Next to that, there is a strong significant statistical relation between past and future events in sports. This is the most important factor bookmakers use to assess the chance of a certain outcome. Aside from the spread between chances and odds, if statistics of past sport events did not matter, predicted chances and thereby odds would be false and no bookmaker would still be in business.

Therefore, logic dictates that Germany is not a favourite, despite of your "feelings of confidence".

I'm not talking about the Waffen-SS, I don't know why you keep bringing them up.

I'm saying that compared to "Knights Cross Holders", "Obersoldaten" isn't the most unusual thing they've come up with.

In the context of those posts before you, you seemed to agree with the notion that the name "Obersoldaten" is poorly chosen as it implies Waffen-SS controversies.

Either way, what is in a name? Not much, as long as it does not break any international and/or local laws and does not deviate too much from reality. There weren't any regiments with just KCHs, or just Obersoldaten, or just grenadiers with MG42's etc etc. Yet it is perfectly fine to create a CoH squad out of them for the sake of the game.

I know what a Knights Cross is. I was talking about the CoH1 unit though:

I know you were referring to the CoH1 unit. Again, that unit has no specific relationship to the Waffen-SS, which is also clearly shown by some of the distinctive Wehrmacht uniform aspects in that screenshot.