---

I'm going to look at this from a different viewpoint, which will hopefully show why jacko thinks he has a point, but at the same time show that it is invalid...so lets do the maths.

Cast your minds back to the heady days of a five division league. Each division would have approximately 100 players, giving approx 500 players in total. Obviously not everyone would enter the singles, and probably not even half, so let us assume for now that 200 players entered.

Now look at the players who are capable of reaching the later stages of this competition. Eagles and Prop players would feature heavily, along with players from the Better Halfs and Unpredictables, and undoubtedly some other individuals from other teams. It would therefore be reasonable to suggest that there would be 32 "better players" capable of reaching the later stages of the singles, or 1/6 of the total entrants.

For the purpose of this example, let us assume that the first round is drawn with no byes. Everyone has a 1 in 6 chance of playing a "better player", and that includes the "better players" themselves. On that basis, there would probably be 3 matches that pit "better players" against each other. (1/6 of 32 is 6 when rounded to the nearest even number, giving 3 matches)

Let us also assume that the form book holds true in the other games, which would leave 29 "better players" out of the 100 in the next round. This creates the probability that there is approximately a 1 in 3 chance of drawing a better player. On the same basis as before, this would create 5 games where "better players" play each other. This would leave 24 "better players" in the draw for the next round, meaning that 25% of that group have already been eliminated.

With 50 players in the next round, there is now a 1 in 2 chance of meeting a "better player", so it would be reasonable to assume that there would be 12 of the remaining 24 "better players" playing each other, meaning a further 6 are eliminated.

After 3 rounds, the starting group of 32 "better players" has been reduced by nearly half. On the face of it, it could seem that better players are being drawn against each other, but the laws of probability and statistics show that this should actually be a normal, expected outcome. Indeed, any draw where "better players" all avoid each other is actually statistically far less likely, and therefore has a higher probability of being rigged.

I am fully aware that there are a number of assumptions and approximations made within the explanation above. This is purely to demonstrate the principle of the calculation, rather than being bogged down in specifics.

I know I have lived up to my screen name in this long winded explanation, but for those that have read this far, I hope it makes sense, and enables this debate to be concluded without further upset.