Tulsa Range Poll

[JD8]

So you can't or wont explain it statistically, that's fine.

I can't help you if you don't understand/refuse to acknowledge what is and what isn't significant?

Tulsa area is pretty large, 61st and Garnett isn't convenient to the suburbs north, east, and west so the middle of town case doesn't hold weight unless you eliminate the votes from those outside of the immediate Tulsa area.

Tulsa is large? Um no. You can get anywhere in Tulsa in about 15-20mins.

OKC is even larger and in contrast it takes damn near 20-30 mins minimum for anything yet I'll BET you see a higher number than 10% in that poll. This has been my whole point all along.

You sure are gray for a hard core scientific/statistical background guy.

If you didn't understand the concepts I mentioned then certainly this would seem "gray" to you. I mean honestly you've resorted to all the classical remedial forms of argument here. You've got spin, red herring, and now ad hom. Do you have any substance? Or as someone pointed out earlier.... just TRYING to argue for the sake of doing so?

 

[ThaMastaChief]

So you can't or wont explain it statistically, that's fine.

Tulsa area is pretty large, 61st and Garnett isn't convenient to the suburbs north, east, and west so the middle of town case doesn't hold weight unless you eliminate the votes from those outside of the immediate Tulsa area.

You sure are gray for a hard core scientific/statistical background guy.

(about GMT)


Yeah, he does seem like the hard a$$ type.


(Oh no she didn't)

 

[YukonGlocker]

I think we should just leave this thread alone, and await results for the new one.

 

[Shoot Summ]

I can't help you if you don't understand/refuse to acknowledge what is and what isn't significant?



Tulsa is large? Um no. You can get anywhere in Tulsa in about 15-20mins.

OKC is even larger and in contrast it takes damn near 20-30 mins minimum for anything yet I'll BET you see a higher number than 10% in that poll. This has been my whole point all along.



If you didn't understand the concepts I mentioned then certainly this would seem "gray" to you. I mean honestly you've resorted to all the classical remedial forms of argument here. You've got spin, red herring, and now ad hom. Do you have any substance? Or as someone pointed out earlier.... just TRYING to argue for the sake of doing so?

I really asked you to explain because I would like to understand how statistically the numbers illustrate a point. You touted your background, I thought it might be interesting to hear the statistical explanation.

You've done your own spinning as well, you are good at it...

Last post for me on this one.

 

[JD8]

I really asked you to explain because I would like to understand how statistically the numbers illustrate a point. You touted your background, I thought it might be interesting to hear the statistical explanation.

You've done your own spinning as well, you are good at it...

Last post for me on this one.

I've already explained it? Quite clearly I might add.

I've been pretty straight forward. You made a comment, I made a poll....poll is straight forward, poll shows that a majority of people don't choose TFA. You've tried to fill in the blanks ever since. It's really that simple.

 

[Shoot Summ]

I guess I must really be dense, as I've stated before then the poll also shows the majority don't choose Medlocks, USSA, or Oil Capital. I'm sure it's me but I don't see how you can put the majority against 1 when you have 3 others that are in the less than 6% difference from the bottom value. That is why I keep asking you to explain it statistically. I don't care who the bottom value is, or the other 3, call them w, x, y, and z.

 

[JD8]

as I've stated before then the poll also shows the majority don't choose Medlocks, USSA, or Oil Capital.

I wasn't aware that I had mentioned anything to do with popularity of these ranges?

I'm sure it's me but I don't see how you can put the majority against 1 when you have 3 others that are in the less than 6% difference from the bottom value.

Again, red herring aside. 7 out of 79 votes is about as popular as I thought it would be or well within the minority. You said "you'd be surprised"..... well... the numbers aren't there my friend. Considering this is a nice (well kept) convenient, indoor range IN Tulsa, right off a major hwy? I'd say that's embarassing relative to the people in OKC that drive further to go to H&H in larger numbers. (H&H numbers assumption on my part, hopefully the OKC poll will clarify)

That is why I keep asking you to explain it statistically

I have explained it quite clearly. You keep wanting me to provide backing for YOUR interpretations?

 

[Shoot Summ]

Not really, and sure wish I had paid more attention in Stat. Seems that 4 of the 6 observations are grouped in a 5% variance. That illustrates something but I don't know what. If I were shooting I would call it a group and the other 2 flyers.....

 

[YukonGlocker]

This is a nominal variable. You can not calculate variance with a nominal variable. All we can do is run a simple Chi square, which will show that participants did not choose ranges at random, or by chance. There is a preference somewhere; but we can not conclude where the preference is because we have 6 levels.

A follow up study is recommended.

 

[JD8]

Not really, and sure wish I had paid more attention in Stat. Seems that 4 of the 6 observations are grouped in a 5% variance. That illustrates something but I don't know what. If I were shooting I would call it a group and the other 2 flyers.....

Was the initial point relative to the "group" OR the individual?