= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
JoshuaZ comments on 1001 PredictionBook Nights - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (49)
It shouldn't be. Assume that your pundits in general do no better than chance. In a large sample, some of them are going to have to have to do really badly. Even if your pool on average is better than chance one should still expect a few much worse.
That said, even given that, -8.7 by their metric looks really badly.
According to that study, being a lawyer by training was one of the things that caused predictors to do badly. Note that Cal Thomas doesn't fall into that category.