Is 86 points enough for automatic promotion?

[Sheebo]

Yes agreed, that is an example of a team that only needed to beat 3rd place by a point. However, last season, how many points did Brighton need to beat 3rd place by? If we had beaten 3rd place by a point, we'd have 87 points, and we wouldn't have finished in the top two. That's why it's not so simple.

Not necessarily true as you can't just pluck points from thin air - they would have needed to come from other teams for Brighton to claim them - what if 1, 2 or even 6 of these 'bonus' points had come from that 3rd placed team? (At their expense). That would mean we'd have needed less points than you're quoting

 

[Hampster Gull]

This thread is gold

 

[The Wookiee]

This thread is gold

Will be when we get promoted by 86 points !

 

[Triggaaar]

But some people have posted quoted what points the second placed team has got.

Yes, because that's how they're seeing it.

I've seen no mention on this thread what points the third placed team has achieved historically ?

I didn't say there had. He was saying we needed 1 point more than 3rd, which has been said before - post #22 "The second-placed team has very little bearing on how many points are enough for automatic promotion. The third-placed team, however, is a different matter: get one more point than them, or a better goal difference, and you're in the top two."

If that's under 86 points then yes 86 points historically has been enough to get promoted

Neither side of the argument is completely correct, it's just not that simple (as I will attempt to explain below).

To answer you're question we'd be 3rd. And Watford would have needed 87 points and a better GD in your example.

Exactly - ie, it's not a simple answer.

If, over the last x number of years, the average points the 3rd team gets is 85, and the average points the 2nd team gets is 87, and say we get 86 this year, where will we finish? We've probably beaten 3rd place, but probably not beaten 2nd place. But those two simple averages (85 and 87) do not take into account that this years record will show us as one of those teams - when this year is looked back on, our score of 86 will be on the record books, perhaps as the 3rd place team, perhaps as the 2nd, and the previous averages can't give us a clue which it's most likely to be.

So my opinion is that the number of points required, on average, is the average of all the 2nd and 3rd place totals.

Not necessarily true as you can't just pluck points from thin air - they would have needed to come from other teams for Brighton to claim them - what if 1, 2 or even 6 of these 'bonus' points had come from that 3rd placed team? (At their expense). That would mean we'd have needed less points than you're quoting

Very true (and totally unnecessary use of a jester hat ). That's another part of why it's not simple. As you say, for a team that did as badly as us to have done well, we'd have had to taken a lot of points off of other clubs, whereas had 'boro got 2 more points last year, and beaten 3rd place, it still wouldn't have been enough to beat Watford. In the same vein of thinking, if 2nd place teams had achieved less points, other teams, perhaps those in 3rd, would have got more. Although that is splitting hairs.

 

[dangull]

My head is hurting reading this thread

 

[Triggaaar]

My head is hurting reading this thread

Just have a guess how many points you think we'll need, and ignore the rest.

 

[essbee]

86 will definitely be enough for top 2. Unless... Its not enough. Then it wont be enough

Well, cheers for that!

 

[essbee]

This thread is gold

Tending to agree Hammy.

 

[beardy gull]

I'll try again. Take any seasons final standings. How many points did the team finishing second NEED to finish second. I'm not adding any other team into the league. They NEEDED +1 better GD than the team in third. They may well have got more than that to finish second but they didn't NEED those extra points. Tell me I'm wrong.

 

[JonnyComeEarly]

As long as we beat the team finishing 1st by 1 point we will be first. Therefore we only need to beat the team in 2nd to be 1st. And beat the team in 2nd by 1 point to push them to 3rd and to finish 2nd.

 

[Simster]

I'll try again. Take any seasons final standings. How many points did the team finishing second NEED to finish second. I'm not adding any other team into the league. They NEEDED +1 better GD than the team in third. They may well have got more than that to finish second but they didn't NEED those extra points. Tell me I'm wrong.

No one is arguing with your methodology, just that there are several ways of looking at it: either we look to do better than the third placed team, or we look to overhaul what the second placed team got. Both are reasonable comparisons, neither is wrong.

 

[warmleyseagull]

I'll try again. Take any seasons final standings. How many points did the team finishing second NEED to finish second. I'm not adding any other team into the league. They NEEDED +1 better GD than the team in third. They may well have got more than that to finish second but they didn't NEED those extra points. Tell me I'm wrong.

Neither approach is wrong. It just depends on your perspective. Take an example of last season. Watford would have gone up with two points fewer. Your approach works.

Now look at Middlesbrough. Had they beaten us on final day they would have one point more than Norwich who finished 3rd This is exactly the scenario you set out, but it would not have been enough because Watford achieved 89.

So there is not AN answer. Add to this the point made below that if points are 'lost' by the second team they may be 'lost' to competitors close in the table and it becomes even more opaque. I think the average of 2nd/3rd position solution or simply quoting a range is really the only way to view it. My take is that 84 points is unlikely to be enough, 88 probably is, but that is alchemy as much as science.

 

[beardy gull]

Good grief. You people. If Watford had got 86 points and a better GD where would they have finished?

 

[Triggaaar]

I'll try again.

To understand it?

Take any seasons final standings. How many points did the team finishing second NEED to finish second.

We know that that team only needed 1 more point than 3rd, but that's not the question we're asking. We're asking how many points do we need. I could equally say to you "Take any seasons final standings. How many points did the team finishing third NEED to finish second?"

You're only seeing it from your point of view, you're missing the bigger picture.

Good grief. You people. If Watford had got 86 points and a better GD where would they have finished?

Second. And if Middlesbrough had got 86 points and a better GD, where would they have finished?

 

[Triggaaar]

I think the average of 2nd/3rd position solution or simply quoting a range is really the only way to view it.

Exactly.

 

[beardy gull]

No. The question is an easy one. How many points are required to finish second historically. The answer is simple and there isn't more than one way to look at it. You're all over complicating a very simple question. We don't want to beat the team in second we want to BE the team in second.

 

[DavePage]

so 10 wins and 6 losses, and that’s not achievable ?

 

[grawhite]

We will need 91 points or more to get automatics.

 

[Rugrat]

Just have a guess how many points you think we'll need, and ignore the rest.

90

(get out clause) Or more than 1 of Burnley or Hull

 

[Bigtomfu]

Applying your logic no one will perform better either.

I'm just saying people are a bit deluded if they think 86 is enough.

5 very competitive teams this year when it is usually 3.

90/91 will get us second given our shocking goal difference.

But the more competitive the scenario I would expect the lower the required points total for each position as they can't all win all of the points.

For us not losing tonight is key, followed by a need to beat at least two of Burnley/Boro and Derby.