Bills Mafia won something this year. Highest blood alcohol level

[Success]

Hang the banner.  They can never take this away from us.  

[Cusefan66214]

When it's too tough for them, it's just right for us!!!

[US Egg]

Title’s Ours!


 

Edited February 28, 2023 by I am the egg man

[The Wiz]

3 hours ago, The Firebaugh Kid said:

Every year lol

All year.

[djp14150]

6 hours ago, JerseyBills said:

🤣🤣

Not surprised 

Go Bills👍

 

they need to drink slightly less to get a 0.716…..

[HardyBoy]

4 hours ago, PrimeTime101 said:

right. And how many people you think at a bills game will subject themselves to a breath test? LOL

 

And lets just say for ***** sakes that is what they did? So maybe at the most 5% of 60k agree to it? Do you think that maybe 5% (3,000 people) that did it represents enough of the people for it to be accurate? and do you think even after that, if they did it say half the games that it represents a sure accurate number?

 

come on man...

 

lol

 

And

 

can you imagine the costs of doing a vast amount of breath tests would be? 

 

A hand held BAC thing, why exactly would that cost a ton? Also, you would need way less than 3,000 people to do a statistical analysis if you have a representative sample (pretty sure you can get statistical significance of a random sample of 30).

 

My guess is they went to various backers bars of various teams and randomly picked people. I doubt they walked around tailgates at the stadium. Probably something where you got a free pint glass for blowing into a hand held thing. Also, you're taking this way too seriously, it's a light hearted stupid internet list.

[LABILLBACKER]

I'm so proud of my fellow fans. I've waited years for this moment.  No one circles the liquor store like the Buffalo Bills. 

[3rdand12]

4 hours ago, Bubba Gump said:

So stupid. I have never been breathalyzed, nor have I ever seen anyone been tested in or around the stadium. Just another useless opinion of someone taking a shot at Buffalo.

No NO Bubba  this is a Win !!

[SydneyBillsFan]

Great news - do we get a comp pick?

[The Wiz]

1 hour ago, SydneyBillsFan said:

Great news - do we get a comp pick?

Maybe $2 Blue drafts at certain bars.

 

I'm guessing the total from those sales would have paid Allen's contract.

Edited February 26, 2023 by The Wiz

[PrimeTime101]

5 hours ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

Probably the ones too drunk to realize what a dumb thing this is to do.

do doubt

5 hours ago, brianthomas said:

Yeah, if they had asked the police for each city: "what is the average BAC of those you arrested at the games", at least there'd be a scientific approach to this calculation as opposed to random correspondents.

 

Also on twitter today was how our wr's led the league in dropped passes.

I mention it because its one of the reasons why we drink so much.

Outsiders think its because we love to party (which we do), but you try living thru 17 seasons of no playoffs & go to the games... alcohol was all we had sometimes lol.

For starters, Police could not be specific to cases. Secondly.. Ho many get dwi driving home from the stadium... Just for chits and giggles lets say that number is 100. does that 100 represent 60k?    come on man... we are both reasonable people and there is no way they can back their numbers with facts

[PrimeTime101]

3 hours ago, HardyBoy said:

 

A hand held BAC thing, why exactly would that cost a ton? Also, you would need way less than 3,000 people to do a statistical analysis if you have a representative sample (pretty sure you can get statistical significance of a random sample of 30).

 

My guess is they went to various backers bars of various teams and randomly picked people. I doubt they walked around tailgates at the stadium. Probably something where you got a free pint glass for blowing into a hand held thing. Also, you're taking this way too seriously, it's a light hearted stupid internet list.

to have a specific score yea.. its expensive. so lets say its 500 people. Does 500 people represent the other 60 k? you just made it look even worse.

[HardyBoy]

3 hours ago, PrimeTime101 said:

to have a specific score yea.. its expensive. so lets say its 500 people. Does 500 people represent the other 60 k? you just made it look even worse.

 

Yes, that's exactly what a representative sample study is!

 

Obviously, I doubt this "study" was stringent enough in their sampling method, but go watch a YouTube video on "representative sampling"

[RocCityRoller]

19 hours ago, HardyBoy said:

 

A hand held BAC thing, why exactly would that cost a ton? Also, you would need way less than 3,000 people to do a statistical analysis if you have a representative sample (pretty sure you can get statistical significance of a random sample of 30).

 

My guess is they went to various backers bars of various teams and randomly picked people. I doubt they walked around tailgates at the stadium. Probably something where you got a free pint glass for blowing into a hand held thing. Also, you're taking this way too seriously, it's a light hearted stupid internet list.

 

A population of 70,000 (fans in attendance) would require a sample of 2300 for a margin of error of 2% at a confidence interval of 95%.

 

One would have to approach nearly 5k given that 50% of respondents may agree to participate.

Edited February 27, 2023 by RocCityRoller

[JoPoy88]

11 hours ago, MJS said:

I'd like to see that methodology.

BACtrack makes handheld consumer breathalyzers that use companion mobile apps. I cannot find a link to this past season’s “study” but a quick search shows they’ve been putting out these reports annually going back to 2015 at least. I’m 99% sure they just used their app and location data to make their determinations. It’s not a “study” in anything close to an academic sense, and I don’t think it’s meant to be taken all that seriously.

7 hours ago, HardyBoy said:

 

A hand held BAC thing, why exactly would that cost a ton? Also, you would need way less than 3,000 people to do a statistical analysis if you have a representative sample (pretty sure you can get statistical significance of a random sample of 30).

 

My guess is they went to various backers bars of various teams and randomly picked people. I doubt they walked around tailgates at the stadium. Probably something where you got a free pint glass for blowing into a hand held thing. Also, you're taking this way too seriously, it's a light hearted stupid internet list.

most BACtrack devices cost less than $100.

[MJS]

7 hours ago, HardyBoy said:

 

A hand held BAC thing, why exactly would that cost a ton? Also, you would need way less than 3,000 people to do a statistical analysis if you have a representative sample (pretty sure you can get statistical significance of a random sample of 30).

 

My guess is they went to various backers bars of various teams and randomly picked people. I doubt they walked around tailgates at the stadium. Probably something where you got a free pint glass for blowing into a hand held thing. Also, you're taking this way too seriously, it's a light hearted stupid internet list.

"Random" is actually the hard part. It's very difficult to get a truly random, representative sample. You overcome that somewhat by getting a larger sample size.

 

It's not random because you are only getting those who are willing to participate. Also, the location you take the tests introduces bias. The gender of the person administering the test, etc., etc.

 

It can only truly be random if you choose a random selection of seats all around the stadium and require the people in those seats to test.

 

So,  researchers do the best they can and just try to get as large of a sample as they can, hoping it is somewhat representative. This study? It probably just took a few samples and called it good. There's no way they actually did an adequately statistically significant job on this.

[JoPoy88]

1 minute ago, MJS said:

"Random" is actually the hard part. It's very difficult to get a truly random, representative sample. You overcome that somewhat by getting a larger sample size.

 

It's not random because you are only getting those who are willing to participate. Also, the location you take the tests introduces bias. The gender of the person administering the test, etc., etc.

 

It can only truly be random if you choose a random selection of seats all around the stadium and require the people in those seats to test.

 

So,  researchers do the best they can and just try to get as large of a sample as they can, hoping it is somewhat representative. This study? It probably just took a few samples and called it good. There's no way they actually did an adequately statistically significant job on this.

Again, it ain’t that serious. Study was the wrong word to use in the tweet.

 

From an older report:

”BACtrack is a company which develops smartphone breathalyzers. The company used this technology to anonymously collect BAC data from users of BACtrack Mobileduring game days up until October 26.”

[PrimeTime101]

5 hours ago, HardyBoy said:

 

Yes, that's exactly what a representative sample study is!

 

Obviously, I doubt this "study" was stringent enough in their sampling method, but go watch a YouTube video on "representative sampling"

I have, and trust me... 500 people do not represent 60k. sample size is to small to be accurate. thats been my point and i stand behind that point.

[machine gun kelly]

19 hours ago, PrimeTime101 said:

seriously.... there is no way as a whole they could prove or deny these numbers... they maybe asked what 1000 people what they think there alc. content was? this is so beyond stupid....

Exactly!  There is no way they can accurately predict the avg.  BAC for each stadium.

 

This is a nonsense article.  Is it possible our folks were pretty happy?  Sure, but did they just poll certain lots where people tend to down a bit?  Probably.

[PrimeTime101]

49 minutes ago, machine gun kelly said:

Exactly!  There is no way they can accurately predict the avg.  BAC for each stadium.

 

This is a nonsense article.  Is it possible our folks were pretty happy?  Sure, but did they just poll certain lots where people tend to down a bit?  Probably.

not only that, they would have to do EVERY GAME... its just stupid. thanks for getting it.