PDA

View Full Version : Chicago Fans Lean To Cubs


CubKilla
02-22-2002, 11:37 AM
CBS 2/Chicago Sun-Times Poll

"Just as spring training gets under way, Chicagoans seem to have more faith the the North Side team will produce a winning season, a CBS 2/Chicago Sun-Times poll showed.

Sixty-eight percent of those surveyed Thursday said they think the Cubs will have a better season than the White Sox, according to the exclusive poll of 405 residents from the Chicago area.

Only 29 percent said the White Sox would have the better seson.

Fifty-three percent also believe the Cubs will win their division title, while only 38 percent are as confident in the White Sox.

The poll, conducted by SurveyUSA, has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points."

After reading this crap year-in-and-year-out, I'm beginning to think that maybe, just maybe, the things the people of Wisconsin and St. Louis say about Chicagoans are true. The fact that Chicagoans are so enamored with a group of suck-a$$ losers makes me ashamed to call myself a Chicagoan. But, hopefully, come October, I can take this survey to the Sun-Times, CBS 2, SurveyUSA, and Cub fans throughout Chicago and shove it right up their a$$. "F" THE F'N CUBS!!!!! CUBKILLA 4 LIFE.

czalgosz
02-22-2002, 11:47 AM
Whatever - people who think the Cubs will have a better year than the Sox just aren't paying attention, or they don't know baseball. Adding a power-hitter to your lineup does basically nothing to help you in the standings, which is all the Cubs did this off-season.

In a way, I'm glad the Cubs got Moises Alou. He ensured that the Cubs will once again be in contention at the trading deadline, so that the Cubs will trade away more prospects, and the inevitable slow fade in August and September will crush Cub fan's hopes even more.

bjmarte
02-22-2002, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by czalgosz


In a way, I'm glad the Cubs got Moises Alou. He ensured that the Cubs will once again be in contention at the trading deadline, so that the Cubs will trade away more prospects, and the inevitable slow fade in August and September will crush Cub fan's hopes even more.

So true, poor scrubbies :whiner:

doctor30th
02-22-2002, 12:13 PM
"An exclusive poll of 405 Chicago residence"

1st off, it's a bad poll. 405 people is not a good sample of the millions in the Greater Chicago metroplitan area.

2ndly, How much you wanna bet that they fixed this poll so 60-70% of the people surveyed were "randomly" selected from the north side.

Media polls done by the media themselves are hardly accurate. They never take random samples of the area, and they always take too small of the sample.

I see channel 2 and Kotex Boy behind this.

I also bet they didn't survey anyone in the Suburbs. It's a really biased and set-up poll. They could have told us the answers before they actually did it.

Now that I think about it, didn't I see them giving this poll to people in line to get wrist bands for Cubs tickets yesterday?

Foulke You
02-22-2002, 12:44 PM
I too saw the ridiculous "poll" in the Sun-Times this morning. 1st off, they made it a point to stick the article in the Sox coverage with the headline "Chicago leans to Cubs" almost like they were saying "told you so" to all the Sox fans reading their tabloid. (I subscribe so I guess I have myself to blame.) 402 people out of 6 million in the Chicago area? Are they kidding? They could do this poll every year and all the Cubs fans are going to say that the Cubs are going to better than the Sox. They ALWAYS think they're going to the playoffs every year. All that "hope springs eternal" nonsense that is associated with the North Side bums. Try polling some people in Berwyn, Calumet City, or Oak Lawn and see how many people lean towards the Cubs! Ugh!

Nellie_Fox
02-22-2002, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by doctor30th
"1st off, it's a bad poll. 405 people is not a good sample of the millions in the Greater Chicago metroplitan area.
Actually, depending on how confident and accurate you want to be, you'd be surprised at how small of a sample you need to cover a pretty big area. For example, a sample of 271 will yield a 90% confidence interval with an accuracy of +- 5% with an infinite population.

I do know that a 3 million population would be identical to an infinite population for all intents and purposes in these calculations. I don't have all my statistics books here at work with me, so I can't figure out the likely confidence interval and accuracy specified to achieve the sample of 405, but suffice it to say that it would be more accurate than 90% confidence and +- 5% accuracy. (That means that 90% of similar samples taken would have a group mean within +- 5% of the means reported in this sample.)

Have I sufficiently confused you?

voodoochile
02-22-2002, 01:04 PM
Originally posted by Nellie_Fox

Actually, depending on how confident and accurate you want to be, you'd be surprised at how small of a sample you need to cover a pretty big area. For example, a sample of 271 will yield a 90% confidence interval with an accuracy of +- 5% with an infinite population.

I do know that a 3 million population would be identical to an infinite population for all intents and purposes in these calculations. I don't have all my statistics books here at work with me, so I can't figure out the likely confidence interval and accuracy specified to achieve the sample of 405, but suffice it to say that it would be more accurate than 90% confidence and +- 5% accuracy. (That means that 90% of similar samples taken would have a group mean within +- 5% of the means reported in this sample.)

Have I sufficiently confused you?

Excellent point, Nellie...

People probably don't realize how few people get polled in these things. Your average presidential voting poll has less than 1000 answers for a population of over 260 million....

Iwritecode
02-22-2002, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by Nellie_Fox

Actually, depending on how confident and accurate you want to be, you'd be surprised at how small of a sample you need to cover a pretty big area. For example, a sample of 271 will yield a 90% confidence interval with an accuracy of +- 5% with an infinite population.

I do know that a 3 million population would be identical to an infinite population for all intents and purposes in these calculations. I don't have all my statistics books here at work with me, so I can't figure out the likely confidence interval and accuracy specified to achieve the sample of 405, but suffice it to say that it would be more accurate than 90% confidence and +- 5% accuracy. (That means that 90% of similar samples taken would have a group mean within +- 5% of the means reported in this sample.)

Have I sufficiently confused you?

Yes, but wouldn't the results be skewed if most of the 405 sampled were either standing in line for Cubs tickets or at least living somewhere in "Wrigleyville"?

doctor30th
02-22-2002, 01:30 PM
No you didn't confuse me. I was a sociology major, and had to take alot of classes in Statistics.

I know that when I had to do a sample of the 20,000 students at my school, my random sample was 100 people. But they were from everyone that went to the school. My problem with this poll is that it's an exclusive poll of chicago only, and not the merto area (including suburbs).

There are two criteria for a sample: representativeness and Adequacy. I do not believe it represents the actual fan base of either team for one.

This sample was significantly less than 10% of the population. The odds of a small sample being skewed is far greater than that of a larger more representitive sample.

I would bet that they also used Nonprobability sampling, where the people of the population of Chicago selected do not have an equal chance of being selected. Where the more proper Probability sample allows for everyone to have an equal chance.

czalgosz
02-22-2002, 01:40 PM
Originally posted by doctor30th
No you didn't confuse me. I was a sociology major, and had to take alot of classes in Statistics.

I know that when I had to do a sample of the 20,000 students at my school, my random sample was 100 people. But they were from everyone that went to the school. My problem with this poll is that it's an exclusive poll of chicago only, and not the merto area (including suburbs).

There are two criteria for a sample: representativeness and Adequacy. I do not believe it represents the actual fan base of either team for one.

This sample was significantly less than 10% of the population. The odds of a small sample being skewed is far greater than that of a larger more representitive sample.

I would bet that they also used Nonprobability sampling, where the people of the population of Chicago selected do not have an equal chance of being selected. Where the more proper Probability sample allows for everyone to have an equal chance.

In the end, whether or not the Sox or the Cubs make the playoffs will not be decided on a popularity poll, it will be decided on the field. If that poll is correct, that just means that there's a lot of ill-informed Cub fans and/or a lot of pessimistic White Sox fans, both of which I can believe.

cheeses_h_rice
02-22-2002, 01:44 PM
I think the results merely reflect the proportion of fans of each team. Don't tell me you think there are more Sox fans in Chicago, do you?

I wouldn't get too worked up over it. We'll see where both teams wind up come October -- I think vindication will be on our side.

doctor30th
02-22-2002, 01:47 PM
Actually that is my point, that there are probably more Cubs fans' within the city of Chicago. I just think it's a bunk poll. If you want to take a poll of an actual fanbase, it should be of the whole fanbase, including the suburbs.

Trust me I care very little about what people opinions are of the teams in Chicago. The only opinion that matters to me is my own.

czalgosz
02-22-2002, 01:50 PM
Originally posted by cheeses_h_rice
I think the results merely reflect the proportion of fans of each team. Don't tell me you think there are more Sox fans in Chicago, do you?

I wouldn't get too worked up over it. We'll see where both teams wind up come October -- I think vindication will be on our side.

When I was in high school (1989-1993), I would say that there were about the same number, or maybe slightly more Sox fans than Cub fans in the Chicago area. Now? I don't know, as I moved away not long after.

But I do agree that I think the Sox will end up with the better record, and they definitely have a better shot at the postseason, almost by default, as the Sox are in the weaker division.

doctor30th
02-22-2002, 01:54 PM
I just find it funny, that when something good happens in a city around chicago, they call it a suburb, when something bad happens, the city stands on its own.

So when its convient to say Chicago fans lean toward the cubs, they only use the city itself and not the "suburbs" that they lay claim to the rest of the time.

It's more the media that bothers me that the poll itself. They consider the "suburbs" part of the city only when its convienent to there story. Even though many of the places they consider suburbs are cities that are not really suburbs.

Iwritecode
02-22-2002, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by doctor30th
I just find it funny, that when something good happens in a city around chicago, they call it a suburb, when something bad happens, the city stands on its own.

So when its convient to say Chicago fans lean toward the cubs, they only use the city itself and not the "suburbs" that they lay claim to the rest of the time.

It's more the media that bothers me that the poll itself. They consider the "suburbs" part of the city only when its convienent to there story. Even though many of the places they consider suburbs are cities that are not really suburbs.

I've talked to people who think Rockford is a suburb...

:gulp:

Iwritecode
02-22-2002, 02:10 PM
Originally posted by doctor30th
Actually that is my point, that there are probably more Cubs fans' within the city of Chicago. I just think it's a bunk poll. If you want to take a poll of an actual fanbase, it should be of the whole fanbase, including the suburbs.

Trust me I care very little about what people opinions are of the teams in Chicago. The only opinion that matters to me is my own.

You have to be very careful when talking about Cubs "fans". As far as intelligent fans that pay attention to the game and have some clue as to what's going on, I say the Sox and Cubs are pretty close. The rest of the people at Wrigley are just there to drink and look at women in bikini tops.

Pete_SSAC
02-22-2002, 02:10 PM
I want to know where this poll was taken. At the Cubbie-Bear I bet.

- Pete

PaleHoseGeorge
02-22-2002, 02:18 PM
I honestly wouldn't put too much weight behind any silly poll conducted on such a frivolous topic--regardless of the statistical methodology--if conducted by the Sun-Times. The whole paper has the same operating philosophy that drives most of Jay Mariotti's sports columns. Basically, they'll say or do anything to draw attention to themselves.

The most you can say for these numbers is that an awful lot of Chicagoans are basically baseball ignorant. All of us here knew that already. We've watched the Flubbie telecasts from Wrigley Field.

:smile:

bjmarte
02-22-2002, 02:35 PM
Originally posted by Iwritecode


I've talked to people who think Rockford is a suburb...

:gulp:

I was accused of living in a suburb of Chicago once, on a Chicago radio station.

SoxRulecubsdrool
02-22-2002, 04:14 PM
:gulp:
What's new! It doesn't surprise me. I bunch of idiots parading around saying the cubs are the best team of all time is nothing new. One of my dumbass brother in laws every year tries telling me that the cubs are a "real team" however cannot back it up with anything. What the hell is a "real team" anyway. Another brother in law knows nothing about baseball, knows nothing of the trades, nothing whatsoever, but marches to wrigley every other day and thinks they're the greatest.
Get ready! It's another year of the media sticking their nose up the ivy coated rear end of mediocrity. I'm use to it.


:gulp: Drink heavily!

doublem23
02-22-2002, 08:25 PM
Originally posted by CubsF'nBlow
CBS 2/Chicago Sun-Times Poll

"Just as spring training gets under way, Chicagoans seem to have more faith the the North Side team will produce a winning season, a CBS 2/Chicago Sun-Times poll showed.

Sixty-eight percent of those surveyed Thursday said they think the Cubs will have a better season than the White Sox, according to the exclusive poll of 405 residents from the Chicago area.

Only 29 percent said the White Sox would have the better seson.

Fifty-three percent also believe the Cubs will win their division title, while only 38 percent are as confident in the White Sox.

The poll, conducted by SurveyUSA, has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points."

After reading this crap year-in-and-year-out, I'm beginning to think that maybe, just maybe, the things the people of Wisconsin and St. Louis say about Chicagoans are true. The fact that Chicagoans are so enamored with a group of suck-a$$ losers makes me ashamed to call myself a Chicagoan. But, hopefully, come October, I can take this survey to the Sun-Times, CBS 2, SurveyUSA, and Cub fans throughout Chicago and shove it right up their a$$. "F" THE F'N CUBS!!!!! CUBKILLA 4 LIFE.

Good Lord.... Man, this is exactly what it's like at St. Patty's... It's gonna be real funny when the Cubs are in the cellar and the Sox are in the play-offs come October...

This is what annoys me about Cub fans... Not that they're stupid, but they think they know what they're talking about... Jesus.

I got $10 saying the vast majority of the 69% of the people who said the Cubs are the better team couldn't even name enough Scrubbies to make a lineup.

Jerry_Manuel
02-22-2002, 09:04 PM
Originally posted by doublem23
I got $10


You don't have 10 dollars, Doub. :smile:

Spiff
02-22-2002, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by doublem23


Good Lord.... Man, this is exactly what it's like at St. Patty's... It's gonna be real funny when the Cubs are in the cellar and the Sox are in the play-offs come October...

Yeh it will be hilarious if you're still there in October...

doublem23
02-22-2002, 09:44 PM
Originally posted by Wh1teSox00


Yeh it will be hilarious if you're still there in October...

I'll still have my ties... I'll be around... I love St. Pat's way too much to just leave it...

Spiff
02-22-2002, 09:54 PM
Originally posted by doublem23


I'll still have my ties... I'll be around... I love St. Pat's way too much to just leave it...

Like I said, hilarious. Wicked hilarious.

Pete_SSAC
02-23-2002, 12:56 AM
This poll is proof that the War on Drugs is not working. How can we possible win when :bluerock usage is so widespread and publicly PRAISED.

- Pete, "Sure, causal use is fine, until it kills any common sense you have."

dugwood31
02-23-2002, 01:46 AM
Telephone polls are also biased toward upper class households (I used to work for Gallup when I was in college).

Typically, people with higher educational levels understand the purpose of the poll and are willing to finish it.

They also understand why demographic information is important (how much money you make, how many people in the household, etc.). The way it works with these polls is that even if you answer every question, if you won't tell them how much money you make, your answers won't be counted. Even working for a high profile firm like Gallup, less than 1/3 of the people we called would talk to us.

Also, they make the calls in the evening, when white collar workers are home for sure but blue collar workers could be working second shift.

So it's conceivable that they tried to call like 1000 households and only 400 odd people were home and willing to answer, and the disproportionate number of these people were white collar types.

So Cubs/Sox polls will always be skewed against the more blue collar South Side and suburbs than the upper class North Side and North Suburbs.

doublem23
02-23-2002, 01:48 AM
Originally posted by Wh1teSox00
Like I said, hilarious. Wicked hilarious.

School pride is hilarious now? Oh well... Dammit, we didn't do as well as I was hoping in the State swimming Finals... I'm a tad pissed... That, and Hart's War sucked, so that was a waste of $8.50... Though, Ridgeway did have a good showing at the 100-Yard Breaststroke... We'll see.... Man, I can still smell a State Championship.

Oh well, either way, yeah, I agree, Cub fans are stupid.

Cubbiesuck13
02-24-2002, 01:14 AM
I used to enjoy talking baseball to cubfans and embarassing them do to lack of knowledge, as i discovered message boards im a little tired of it. One thing that i do like is discussing baseball with fans of baseball. So hard to do nowadays. Thanks WSI! Someone posted earlier about the ratio of knowledgeable sox-cub fans, I agree with the equality of them, but if you take how many true sox fans out of sox fans that do not know anything about them v. knowledgeable cubfans out of all cubfans, dumbass and all, i think the Sox have a better ratio. So many things i hate about the biased towards the cubs, one of them has to be on TV shows or Movies, if its in chicago and has a little sports thrown in, 9 out of 10 its a cub shirt someone has on or a wrigley shot. One movie i can think of that never had this was my best friends wedding, yes i saw it but i dint want to. The thing i was most impressed with was the comiskey scene. they announced Ozzie Guillen as coming to bat in the background.
:bluesbros