You are not logged in.

- Topics: Active | Unanswered

**Nougati****Guest**

Yeah umm, I'm trying to work out the average and it's either my memory is busted or I'm really doing something wrong.

I gotta work out the average of these medal totals for this project.

The totals are for the winter olympics each time they're on, and they're the data for Netherlands.

9+6+4+0+7+4+4+11+8+9

I added those together and the total i got was 124.

I then divided that by 10 to get 12.4, but I don't understand how on earth the average isn't within the range of the lowest and highest numbers, i've added the numbers three times now, and there seems to be no differentiating between the results I'm ending up with. The only conclusion I'm drawing is that:

1. I'm terribly bad at punching numbers together in a calculator tonight.

or

2. I have forgotten some sort of trick of the trade with working out the averages.

Is it supposed to be out of the range and have i just made that rule up somehow?

Or what?

I dunno..

Thanks.

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,211

Hi Nougati;

The problem is:

9+6+4+0+7+4+4+11+8+9 = 62 not 124.

So the average is 62 / 10 = 6.2

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**amethyst****Guest**

What about finding the average price if you have 50 units at $5 and 100 units at $10?

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,211

Hi amethyst;

What about finding the average price if you have 50 units at $5 and 100 units at $10?

Do it this way:

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**Samkin****Guest**

OK guys try and estimate the average of this....

In 2006-2007 the HFEA Guide to Infertility tells us that The Number of Patients UNDERGOING IVF is 29688 and that The Number Of CYCLES OF IVF treatment is 38264

The question is.. Based on the figures above estimate the number of CYCLES OF IVF that each patient received?

Another one..

In 2006-2007 the HFEA Guide to Infertility tells us that The Number of Patients UNDERGOING DONOR INSEMINATION is 3158 and that The Number of CYCLES OF DONOR INSEMINATION is 7350

The question is the same as the first question but with these numbers instead.

Lastly...

In 2006-2007 the HFEA Guide to Infertility tells us The Number of children born through IVF is 8251 successful births - giving rise to 10242 children

and that Donor Insemination gave birth to 782 successful births - giving rise to 825 children

The question asks you... For both IVF and Donor Insemination why are there more chldren produced compared to the number of successful births

Much appriciated xxx

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,211

Hi Samkin;

Welcome to the forum.

I may be missing something gigantic here but why would you not just do this?

38264 / 29688 = 1.28887092

For the next one:

7350 / 3158 = 2.32742242

I know I am going to get blasted on this. Could there be more children than births because some births have multiple children?

You know, twins, triplets, quadruplets etc.

Now what the heck do I know about birthing. But isn't the birth of twins considered 1 birthing. 2 kiddies 1 birthing.

The question I am asking you is how do you get 825 children from 792 births without considering twins as 1 birth?

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**Lucyy x****Guest**

Hey,

does anyone know how to work out the speed of the flow?

its for geography rivers

thanks

lucy

xx

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,211

Hi Lucyy x;

I or someone else might if you would show the problem.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**kLAUDIA SKORA****Guest**

I REALLY NEED TO WORK OUT AN AVERAGE OF : THERE ARE 17 BOXES. IN THEM THE AMOUNT IS £414,665.61. WHAT IS THE AVERAGE AMOUNT? I CAN'T REMEMBER HOW TO WORK IT OUT CAN SOMEONE HELP ME PLZ?

**bob bundy****Moderator**- Registered: 2010-06-20
- Posts: 6,269

hi kLAUDIA SKORA

Average just means 'share out equally' so you need to do

You might find

http://www.mathisfunforum.com/viewtopic.php?id=14775 post #3

also helps.

Bob

*Last edited by bob bundy (2011-01-23 07:49:32)*

Offline

**marcy****Guest**

hello for science i've got results and i don't know how to work the average out there are some

1.28 1.32 and 1.29 ??? what is the average

yours marcy

x

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,211

Hi marcy;

Just add them up and divide by 3.

Welcome to the forum!

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**ShivamS****Member**- Registered: 2011-02-07
- Posts: 3,465

Three ways:

Mean: Add set of numbers and divide by the number of numbers in the set

Mode=14/3

Median: Middle number in the set. If there are 2, divide their total by 2

Mode: Number which occurs the most

Offline

**number king****Guest**

is this average right

5 people answered yes to my question and there was 3 categorys and 10 people were asked

so i divided 10 by three :D

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,211

Hi number king;

Depends on what you are taking the average of. If you wanted the average number of people per category then you would divide 10 / 3 = 3 + ( 1 / 3 ).

If you wanted the average number of people per category that were right then you would divide 5 / 3 = 1 + ( 2 / 3 ).

Welcome to the forum!

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**wally187****Guest**

Hi,

Can anyone tell me how you work an individual's average rating in a football??? please

**bob bundy****Moderator**- Registered: 2010-06-20
- Posts: 6,269

hi wally187

Are we talking about soccer and goals scored.

If so, do ( total number of goals ) divided by ( number of games played )

In general, an average (strictly it's called the mean average) is found be sharing out whatever between all the situations,

so in the case of any sport share out the goals or runs equally between the games.

If it's salaries, imagine sharing out the total wages equally between all the workers.

If it's a runner's average time for 100m, add up all the times and share out equally between ( divide by ) the number of races.

see graph below:

This shows the average of three numbers (5, 4, 9) is 6.

Bob

*Last edited by bob bundy (2011-04-10 00:40:56)*

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,211

Hi wally187;

Welcome to the forum. Here is one site claiming to do it.

http://de.castrolfootball.com/

It looks complicated. Apparently soccer until late had little means of measuring players performances.

http://11tegen11.wordpress.com/2011/01/ … rformance/

The best and most detailed stats are kept by the NBA which has a stat for everything a player does.

Hi Bob;

Sunday is just beginning over here but it is ending where you are. Can you tell me how it turns out?

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**bob bundy****Moderator**- Registered: 2010-06-20
- Posts: 6,269

hi bobbym,

Nice to hear from you.

Sunday; hhhmmmm let's see. It will be dry and sunny. The garden will look tidy now the Spring pruning is done. The rubbish (trash ?) is out for Monday collection along with the recyclables. The Sun has set in the West. The birds have gone to sleep.

Cannot be certain you can extrapolate similar conditions over in Nevada; sure the Sun's behaviour is 'universal' and will do the same but the rest is subject to local boundary conditions.

I sense another NSF grant in the making.

Bob

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,211

What did you do with the other grant?

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**wally187****Guest**

Hi Guys,

Thanks for your reply, but sorry I did not make myself clear enough. I meant how could I get a players average rating from just one match i.e. how good they play just for that match or does the same format apply, because I'm doing shots off/on target, passes complete/incomplete and tackles in possession. Do I just add them all up when I get data and then divide by 5?

Sorry I'm new to this forum sort of thing, but I do appreciate what your doing for me.

Wally

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,211

Hi wally187;

Sure you can do that but mixing different stats together like that. Will the numbers you get have any meaning?

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**bob bundy****Moderator**- Registered: 2010-06-20
- Posts: 6,269

hi wally187

Now I understand your objective. An average is not really what you are after. You are going to have to invent a weighting system for different events.

eg. scoring a goal should have a high mark, let's say 10 marks. Then, an attempt at goal that misses could be, say, 7 marks, a good cross might be 3 and so on.

After the match you can add up all the marks to get the player's total. I wouldn't bother to divide as every event is positive and a player who does little could end up with a high score.

eg. player 1 gets 10 + 7 + 7 + 3 + 1 +2 = 30. That averages as 30 / 6 = 5

player 2 has 7 alone and nothing more. So his average is 7 / 1 = 7.

Do you really want to say that player 2 is better than player 1 ? I think not.

The raw scores ( 30 and 7 ) give you a better idea of who made the best contributions.

It will be very subjective; that is to say, what you rate as a high mark, might not be what someone else would have given. In the end you'll probably need to adjust the 'weighting marks' according to how things come out.

Have you had a search through the Fantasy Football sites? Maybe someone has already set up such a system.

Bob

ps to bobbym. Oh wow! The Grant ideas just keep coming, don't they?

*Last edited by bob bundy (2011-04-11 00:42:17)*

Offline

**wally187****Guest**

Hi,

That's great guys, thanks a lot for your help, but I probably be back and ask for more help. Sounds good making your own marking scores, but like you say it's gonna be tricky.

The reason why I need help is because I'm doing a research project at college on anxiety verses performance and I have four tests and they are a profile of mood questionnaire, anxiety test and a mental toughness tests. I was gonna get the averages from the three tests then work out what the players rating was and then average it all of it out, but if you got any better ideas, I'm all ears!!!!

Cheers again Guys

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,211

Hi wally187;

Yes, you could make a power formula by weighting which ones you think are more important and that should satisfy your teacher. If you supply your data I can fit it to your results proving that there is a correlation between them. Even if one does not exist!

But, and this is a big but, coming from a town where every third guy is a would be mathematician and statistician. Where people produce and publish power formulas and rating systems every day. No one has ever got rich by following them.

Now for the last point. If Bob Bundy keeps hogging all the grants how can any of my ideas come to fruition?

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline