Bart,
This comment, offered up by CrowHunter, is reflective of the problem that I have with using a statistical model to quantify the highly variable tangibles (and intangibles) that are involved in a gun fight.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CrowHunter
To Poo Poo statistical modeling because it doesn't fit reality is short sighted and demonstrates a basic misunderstanding of how it is used and how results should be interpreted.
|
If it doesn't "fit reality", what's the point? Why bother?
Sure, it's fun to play with numbers and calculators, but the only answers that matter are the ones that actually occur.
I am not saying that you cannot play "what if" 'til your heart's content, but to think that you are going to get real answers from numerical fantasizing is a "fool's errand".
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bart
You seem to be insisting on absolute certainty/always valid assumptions.
|
Yep. Invalid assumptions produce invalid results/conclusions. If I assume that I have a greater "hit rate" then I actually have (an invalid assumption) and draw the conclusion that I need only "x" number of rounds to successfully handle "y" number of attackers (an invalid conclusion) when in fact I'll need more, I am gonna have a really bad day when I come across "y" number of attackers.