Do you actually like what you do?

[jomoco]

Yeah well we're diaper'd after birth n I'm not entirely convinced dyin that way merits any gold rings mate.

 

Jomoco

[Mick Dempsey]

Show us the statistics to back up your assertion. (To Swordsta btw)

[jomoco]

I'll volunteer that it took thirty years in this biz before I cut my cut n Chuck left arm with a 200T.

 

Now I use my handsaw n go smaller!

 

Jomoco

[Marula]

Show us the statistics to back up your assertion. (To Swordsta btw)

 

 

I think you've misunderstood the base line to the original point.

Edited January 4, 2017 by SWORDSTA

[Marula]

I'll volunteer that it took thirty years in this biz before I cut my cut n Chuck left arm with a 200T.

 

Now I use my handsaw n go smaller!

 

Jomoco

 

 

Ouch! I bet you felt that! I took a fingernail off while sharpening an 80! I was jumping around for a good few minutes cursing everything about my life at that moment...

[Jimbo 76]

I think you've misunderstood the base line to the original point.

 

Mr Sword,

 

It is you that doesn't understand statistics and the 'laws'!

 

You are assuming work on is each day is sequential and thus probabilities accumulative.

It's not the case each day's work should be thought as an independent action.

 

 

Cheers,

James.

[Marula]

If you are a climber your work is "sequential", that's what a qualification in a profession leads to, "sequential" duties according to said qualification.

So as a climber you've never had an accident?

[Jimbo 76]

Mr Sword

 

My point is about statistics. And the facts.

In statistics the use of the the word sequential is different from your example.

 

In simplest terms think of a coin being repeatedly tossed. Each action is repetitive and sequential in normal parlance. But not view statistically as sequential. Hence the odds of an outcome are not reliant on previous actions or 'sequential'

 

MR Sword I'm tired and normally would be more polite.

But statically your talking bollocks!

Trust me take a moment and read about stats.

 

Think about your assertion if you were correct the vast majority of accidents would occur after experience was gained.

 

Cheers,

James.

[cornish wood burner]

Mr Sword

 

My point is about statistics. And the facts.

In statistics the use of the the word sequential is different from your example.

 

In simplest terms think of a coin being repeatedly tossed. Each action is repetitive and sequential in normal parlance. But not view statistically as sequential. Hence the odds of an outcome are not reliant on previous actions or 'sequential'

 

MR Sword I'm tired and normally would be more polite.

But statically your talking bollocks!

Trust me take a moment and read about stats.

 

Think about your assertion if you were correct the vast majority of accidents would occur after experience was gained.

 

Cheers,

James.

I think his point was if you do an activity with a certain risk per day then over a 1000 days all things being equal the total risk is 1000 times greater . The incident could occur on the first, last day or not at all, but the total risk remains the same.

[peatff]

Well I didn't spend a decade as an amateur, tree work isn't rocket science, it's fairly basic on the surface once a good mentor is found.

Yes with more experience comes a wiser and safer set of hands, however, Emperical statistical law isn't really debatable, that's why it's a law.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Arbtalk

 

When did this become law and what I don't understand is your use of exponentially. If I go to work for 3 days (theoretical time only ) and don't have any accidents on the fourth day am I four times more likely to have an accident. I would eventually not go out if that was the case as I would be guaranteed to have an accident.