Eklund you’re an idiot, Carolina is not going to only get 6 pts of their remaining 20. Don’t post about hockey ever again you hockey village idiot.
- zt0808

You're taking this waaay too serious, kiddo. At this stage in your life, your primary focus should be how to get laid...

eklund rn

And the Flyers going 7-2-1

What a joke.
- Feds91Stammer

Flyers could definitely pull off a 7-2-1 record to end the year, that's about the pace they've been going at for a few months now. That being said, there's zero chance that Carolina goes 3-8-0 to end, and Montreal going 4-5-1. Most Flyers fans know that the chase is over at this point.

You're taking this waaay too serious, kiddo. At this stage in your life, your primary focus should be how to get laid...
- 21peter

The fact that we have to do this every year i disappointing... it's common knowledge that he's just making all this stuff up. If you keep coming back then that's on you.

Chasing a rumor that Dwayne Klessel cannot do maths

Hi everyone. I’m a first time poster here. I’m doing a PHD in statistics with an emphasis on hockey analytics. Longer term goal is to get a job in the NHL, ideally with my hometown Flames!! Anyways, one thing we’re studying is whether experts can beat the house. So we’ve been studying sites like Bodog, and some of the content from “expert insiders” to see if they truly have an edge. Someone mentioned this website so I’m checking it out. But I’m extremely confused about how the results are tabulated?

For example, on March 14 his picks were 3-7, but then on the next day he reported going 4-6. The cumulative tally said 36-24 but it was really 35-25. We’ve triple-checked this so I’m guessing he either changed a prediction without notifying us readers, or he made a data entry error?

The next day he goes 3-3. So he states 39-27, although we think he’s 38-28.

Then comes the really strange occurrence that I’m trying to figure out. On March 16 (Saturday) he went 4-8, followed by 1-6 on March 17 (Sunday). So 38-28 becomes 43-42. That’s his true record. But even if we take his 39-27 as he stated, once you add 4-8 and 1-6 he should be at 44-41. Yet in his article today he’s claiming to be 40-32. It appears the 4-8 record on Saturday has been omitted from the cumulative tally, as well as yet another random loss on Sunday has been expunged from the record so 1-6 has become 1-5.

I’ve now reached the conclusion that there isn’t any mathematical model behind this simulator since errors like this would be unheard of. Instead it appears as if this entire simulator is being updated manually. That would also explain some of the other anomalies people have reported (ie teams playing 81 games, point totals not adding up correctly, etc...). I think my prof was trolling me suggesting that I look at this site. Haha.

For what its worth, being at 43-42 in this stage of the season is extremely poor. Statistically, after 1/3rd of a season (so 25-30 games in the NHL) you can start to infer the quality of each team. Ironically that's what Scotty Bowman always said...you can figure out after 30 games what kind of team you have. After that 30 game mark, simply betting on the team with a higher winning percentage would yield results of about 70% the rest of the way. So while Eklund is 43-42, betting on the favourites each night has resulted in 60-25.

Looking forward to an Oilers-Flyers Stanley Cup Final...
- uofcguy

anyone who suggests you look at this site is trolling you.

Chasing a rumor that Dwayne Klessel cannot do maths
- PapaSquat

E5

Hi everyone. I’m a first time poster here. I’m doing a PHD in statistics with an emphasis on hockey analytics. Longer term goal is to get a job in the NHL, ideally with my hometown Flames!! Anyways, one thing we’re studying is whether experts can beat the house. So we’ve been studying sites like Bodog, and some of the content from “expert insiders” to see if they truly have an edge. Someone mentioned this website so I’m checking it out. But I’m extremely confused about how the results are tabulated?

For example, on March 14 his picks were 3-7, but then on the next day he reported going 4-6. The cumulative tally said 36-24 but it was really 35-25. We’ve triple-checked this so I’m guessing he either changed a prediction without notifying us readers, or he made a data entry error?

The next day he goes 3-3. So he states 39-27, although we think he’s 38-28.

Then comes the really strange occurrence that I’m trying to figure out. On March 16 (Saturday) he went 4-8, followed by 1-6 on March 17 (Sunday). So 38-28 becomes 43-42. That’s his true record. But even if we take his 39-27 as he stated, once you add 4-8 and 1-6 he should be at 44-41. Yet in his article today he’s claiming to be 40-32. It appears the 4-8 record on Saturday has been omitted from the cumulative tally, as well as yet another random loss on Sunday has been expunged from the record so 1-6 has become 1-5.

I’ve now reached the conclusion that there isn’t any mathematical model behind this simulator since errors like this would be unheard of. Instead it appears as if this entire simulator is being updated manually. That would also explain some of the other anomalies people have reported (ie teams playing 81 games, point totals not adding up correctly, etc...). I think my prof was trolling me suggesting that I look at this site. Haha.

For what its worth, being at 43-42 in this stage of the season is extremely poor. Statistically, after 1/3rd of a season (so 25-30 games in the NHL) you can start to infer the quality of each team. Ironically that's what Scotty Bowman always said...you can figure out after 30 games what kind of team you have. After that 30 game mark, simply betting on the team with a higher winning percentage would yield results of about 70% the rest of the way. So while Eklund is 43-42, betting on the favourites each night has resulted in 60-25.

Looking forward to an Oilers-Flyers Stanley Cup Final...
- uofcguy

And the Flyers going 7-2-1

What a joke.
- Feds91Stammer

I think they could go 7-2-1.

I don't think that will get them in.

Hi everyone. I’m a first time poster here. I’m doing a PHD in statistics with an emphasis on hockey analytics. Longer term goal is to get a job in the NHL, ideally with my hometown Flames!! Anyways, one thing we’re studying is whether experts can beat the house. So we’ve been studying sites like Bodog, and some of the content from “expert insiders” to see if they truly have an edge. Someone mentioned this website so I’m checking it out. But I’m extremely confused about how the results are tabulated?

For example, on March 14 his picks were 3-7, but then on the next day he reported going 4-6. The cumulative tally said 36-24 but it was really 35-25. We’ve triple-checked this so I’m guessing he either changed a prediction without notifying us readers, or he made a data entry error?

The next day he goes 3-3. So he states 39-27, although we think he’s 38-28.

Then comes the really strange occurrence that I’m trying to figure out. On March 16 (Saturday) he went 4-8, followed by 1-6 on March 17 (Sunday). So 38-28 becomes 43-42. That’s his true record. But even if we take his 39-27 as he stated, once you add 4-8 and 1-6 he should be at 44-41. Yet in his article today he’s claiming to be 40-32. It appears the 4-8 record on Saturday has been omitted from the cumulative tally, as well as yet another random loss on Sunday has been expunged from the record so 1-6 has become 1-5.

I’ve now reached the conclusion that there isn’t any mathematical model behind this simulator since errors like this would be unheard of. Instead it appears as if this entire simulator is being updated manually. That would also explain some of the other anomalies people have reported (ie teams playing 81 games, point totals not adding up correctly, etc...). I think my prof was trolling me suggesting that I look at this site. Haha.

For what its worth, being at 43-42 in this stage of the season is extremely poor. Statistically, after 1/3rd of a season (so 25-30 games in the NHL) you can start to infer the quality of each team. Ironically that's what Scotty Bowman always said...you can figure out after 30 games what kind of team you have. After that 30 game mark, simply betting on the team with a higher winning percentage would yield results of about 70% the rest of the way. So while Eklund is 43-42, betting on the favourites each night has resulted in 60-25.

Looking forward to an Oilers-Flyers Stanley Cup Final...
- uofcguy

He is Trump. Facts don't matter.

It did not take long for anyone to figure out there was no simulator.

He is Trump. Facts don't matter.

It did not take long for anyone to figure out there was no simulator.
- Aetherial

Maybe the simulator was....simulated

He is Trump. Facts don't matter.

It did not take long for anyone to figure out there was no simulator.
- Aetherial

Wait, so people here know that there isn't a mathematical model with his 24 factors predicting these games? So why this charade? And why is he fabricating his results? I find this really odd. We looked into some paid site in the US that was awful at forecasting NFL football. But that guy was transparent and basically just admitted that he was having a really poor year and that he was going to shut things down and revisit the factors he was relying on. I feel like that would be appropriate in this case. Admit you are 43-42, which is awful. Admit that San Jose going 13-0 and Calgary going 11-0 and Edmonton and Philly and Vegas are all major mistakes and I'm going to analyze what I've done wrong. My hunch is Eklund put way too much emphasis on the most recent record. Edmonton is 7-2-1 in the last 10, so let's just assume they stay hot for the next 20 games. Oh look, Philly is hot, so they stay hot. Sharks have won 6 in a row, well let's make it 13 more. So is this website considered a bit of a joke then?

eklund rn


- Streit2ThePoint

- Xizord

Kinda looks like tubgirl

Wait, so people here know that there isn't a mathematical model with his 24 factors predicting these games? So why this charade? And why is he fabricating his results? I find this really odd. We looked into some paid site in the US that was awful at forecasting NFL football. But that guy was transparent and basically just admitted that he was having a really poor year and that he was going to shut things down and revisit the factors he was relying on. I feel like that would be appropriate in this case. Admit you are 43-42, which is awful. Admit that San Jose going 13-0 and Calgary going 11-0 and Edmonton and Philly and Vegas are all major mistakes and I'm going to analyze what I've done wrong. My hunch is Eklund put way too much emphasis on the most recent record. Edmonton is 7-2-1 in the last 10, so let's just assume they stay hot for the next 20 games. Oh look, Philly is hot, so they stay hot. Sharks have won 6 in a row, well let's make it 13 more. So is this website considered a bit of a joke then?
- uofcguy

This site is a cesspool of people who enjoy hockey to troll on people who write blogs from their parents basements. All the "sources", "leads", and "simulators" are fabricated by Pelle Eklund, legally known as Dwayne Klessel, who uses his small clout in the Philadelphia hockey scene to get backstage access to sports events and make advertising money from an outdated website by making outlandish claims. The crazier the prediction or rumor, the more trolls come back to comment on the blog, meaning more revenue.

I'd do the same if I were in the same position. Gotta make money somehow.

- Xizord

flyfreaky?

Wait, so people here know that there isn't a mathematical model with his 24 factors predicting these games? So why this charade? And why is he fabricating his results? I find this really odd. We looked into some paid site in the US that was awful at forecasting NFL football. But that guy was transparent and basically just admitted that he was having a really poor year and that he was going to shut things down and revisit the factors he was relying on. I feel like that would be appropriate in this case. Admit you are 43-42, which is awful. Admit that San Jose going 13-0 and Calgary going 11-0 and Edmonton and Philly and Vegas are all major mistakes and I'm going to analyze what I've done wrong. My hunch is Eklund put way too much emphasis on the most recent record. Edmonton is 7-2-1 in the last 10, so let's just assume they stay hot for the next 20 games. Oh look, Philly is hot, so they stay hot. Sharks have won 6 in a row, well let's make it 13 more. So is this website considered a bit of a joke then?
- uofcguy

The website isn't a joke and actually has some decent writers and makes for good hockey talk. But as far as Eklund is concerned, yeah, he's a walking joke on here.

Wait, so people here know that there isn't a mathematical model with his 24 factors predicting these games? So why this charade? And why is he fabricating his results? I find this really odd. We looked into some paid site in the US that was awful at forecasting NFL football. But that guy was transparent and basically just admitted that he was having a really poor year and that he was going to shut things down and revisit the factors he was relying on. I feel like that would be appropriate in this case. Admit you are 43-42, which is awful. Admit that San Jose going 13-0 and Calgary going 11-0 and Edmonton and Philly and Vegas are all major mistakes and I'm going to analyze what I've done wrong. My hunch is Eklund put way too much emphasis on the most recent record. Edmonton is 7-2-1 in the last 10, so let's just assume they stay hot for the next 20 games. Oh look, Philly is hot, so they stay hot. Sharks have won 6 in a row, well let's make it 13 more. So is this website considered a bit of a joke then?
- uofcguy

He got you to read it.

He got you to post.

He got you to read it.

He got you to post.
- Mashadar

Wait, so people here know that there isn't a mathematical model with his 24 factors predicting these games? So why this charade? And why is he fabricating his results? I find this really odd. We looked into some paid site in the US that was awful at forecasting NFL football. But that guy was transparent and basically just admitted that he was having a really poor year and that he was going to shut things down and revisit the factors he was relying on. I feel like that would be appropriate in this case. Admit you are 43-42, which is awful. Admit that San Jose going 13-0 and Calgary going 11-0 and Edmonton and Philly and Vegas are all major mistakes and I'm going to analyze what I've done wrong. My hunch is Eklund put way too much emphasis on the most recent record. Edmonton is 7-2-1 in the last 10, so let's just assume they stay hot for the next 20 games. Oh look, Philly is hot, so they stay hot. Sharks have won 6 in a row, well let's make it 13 more. So is this website considered a bit of a joke then?
- uofcguy

Stay in school kid.

OK. I'm starting to get the schtick here. Thanks everyone.

I figured you guys might enjoy one other prediction that my prof and I were bewildered about. Approximately 24% of NHL games go to OT. But Eklund has an extremely high percentage of his predictions going to OT. One night he predicted 8 out 10 games would go to OT, so 80%, which statistically would be extremely unlikely to ever happen. And then ZERO did. If you were building parameters around a statistical model you would restrict OT games to 24%, or something in that range, and then build in a method to disperse those more randomly as opposed to all of them happening on one night.

But I don't want to give away too many secrets on my thesis... Haha.

OK. I'm starting to get the schtick here. Thanks everyone.

I figured you guys might enjoy one other prediction that my prof and I were bewildered about. Approximately 24% of NHL games go to OT. But Eklund has an extremely high percentage of his predictions going to OT. One night he predicted 8 out 10 games would go to OT, so 80%, which statistically would be extremely unlikely to ever happen. And then ZERO did. If you were building parameters around a statistical model you would restrict OT games to 24%, or something in that range, and then build in a method to disperse those more randomly as opposed to all of them happening on one night.

But I don't want to give away too many secrets on my thesis... Haha.
- uofcguy

Yeah, everyone here is pretty on to what Eklund is. For instance, when he predicts who a player will be traded to, he's right about 3% of the time, which would be the same a picking any one of 31 teams at random. His "sources" aren't true sources, and it's all just smoke and mirrors.

Filler.

OK. I'm starting to get the schtick here. Thanks everyone.

I figured you guys might enjoy one other prediction that my prof and I were bewildered about. Approximately 24% of NHL games go to OT. But Eklund has an extremely high percentage of his predictions going to OT. One night he predicted 8 out 10 games would go to OT, so 80%, which statistically would be extremely unlikely to ever happen. And then ZERO did. If you were building parameters around a statistical model you would restrict OT games to 24%, or something in that range, and then build in a method to disperse those more randomly as opposed to all of them happening on one night.

But I don't want to give away too many secrets on my thesis... Haha.
- uofcguy

what kind of simulator are you running? I'd suggest telling Eklund about this.

Wait, so people here know that there isn't a mathematical model with his 24 factors predicting these games? So why this charade? And why is he fabricating his results? I find this really odd. We looked into some paid site in the US that was awful at forecasting NFL football. But that guy was transparent and basically just admitted that he was having a really poor year and that he was going to shut things down and revisit the factors he was relying on. I feel like that would be appropriate in this case. Admit you are 43-42, which is awful. Admit that San Jose going 13-0 and Calgary going 11-0 and Edmonton and Philly and Vegas are all major mistakes and I'm going to analyze what I've done wrong. My hunch is Eklund put way too much emphasis on the most recent record. Edmonton is 7-2-1 in the last 10, so let's just assume they stay hot for the next 20 games. Oh look, Philly is hot, so they stay hot. Sharks have won 6 in a row, well let's make it 13 more. So is this website considered a bit of a joke then?
- uofcguy

You must be new here.