How to Win the Premier League: The Inside Story of Football’s Data Revolution
Either. Don't overthink it
Thin evidence · 206 ratings of this reading, short of the 250 we trust. So the call is made without the recording’s half of the case. Why we hold that line
Audio is the easier way into this one, and it is easier in audio than most books we hold (in the bottom 31% of our shelf of books for extra work in audio), but that is a fact about the book rather than a recommendation of any particular reading. Only 206 people have rated the reading, so it is not part of this call either way, and 250 is where we start letting a judgement about a reading move a verdict. With nothing we can say about the reading, and nothing about the book itself worth protecting the page for, it genuinely does not matter much. Pick whichever you will actually finish.
Length does not decide this
9h 31m to listen, at 1×7h 37m to listen, at 1.25×6h 21m to listen, at 1.5×5h 26m to listen, at 1.75×4h 46m to listen, at 2×about 10 hours to readabout 7 hours to readabout 6 hours to readabout 4½ hours to readabout 3½ hours to read
The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 296 pages at 30 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 296 pages at 40 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 296 pages at 50 pages an hour, which is about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 296 pages at 65 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 296 pages at 80 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.
Slot → commute-safe
About as demanding in audio as Slaughterhouse-Five.
About as much work in audio as most of the books we hold.
Easier to hear than 75% of the middling-length books we hold.
- Hardcover barely knows this book, so the pace and second-crowd figures rest on very few people.
Reading load against listening load
Where that puts this one among the books we hold: in the bottom 10% of our shelf of books for effort on the page and in the bottom 17% of our shelf of books for effort in your ears. The middle of the scale is not the middle of the shelf (most books sit below the average on both), so a book at 0.00 is already in the top 43% for effort on the page. Each of the three is measured against the whole shelf separately, so the bottom figure is not the top two subtracted. It is this book’s own distance from the middle.
What the audio disadvantage is made of. Two things and no others: how fast readers say this one moves, and how demanding the reviews we read found it. There is no third: the structural one has no data source, so it contributes nothing rather than being guessed at. Both directions are declared priors we have never fitted against a real verdict, which is the weakest-evidenced part of the whole model.
How the call was made
Where a bar carries ticks, the grey one is the middle of our shelf and a coloured one is a line we publish, cool where we start backing the page, warm where we start backing the recording. The evidence squares at the foot are a different thing: how far each of our four sources went, hatched where there was nothing to measure at all.
- The audio case
- 0.57With the reading left out, this figure is the format alone: it is easier in audio than most books we hold (in the bottom 31% of our shelf of books for extra work in audio). Past the line where we start backing the recording. But that line is a claim about a recording, and only 206 people have rated this one, so we did not make it.
- Narration payoff
- 0.00The reading took no part in this call. It scored 0.60 below the middle of our shelf of books (the second mark on the bar), but only 206 people have rated it, short of the 250 at which we let a judgement about a reading move a verdict, so it is recorded at 0.00 and the call rests on the book and the format. No line is drawn on this row, because none was applied.
- What is at stake
- −0.14It sits between the bottom 27% and the top 33% of our shelf of books for how well the print crowds think of a book: middling regard, so this barely moves the call either way. Blended across 3,231 Goodreads ratings and 5 on Hardcover, each scored inside its own population first, and never added together.
For the page
- The crowds’ regard did not reach the line where we protect a first read, this reason did not apply
For the recording
- Too few listeners have rated this reading, so we left the voice out of the call, this reason did not apply
- An easy listen anyway
- Only 206 listeners have rated this reading, under the 250 we ask for, this reason did not apply
Neither column won it: the two came out level, which is the answer above.
A bigger dot counted for more: the voice and the ear are sized by their share of the sum above, the other two by how much stands behind them. A hatched square is a reason that did not apply here, which is not the same as one that counted for little.
- Evidence
- 0.74How much of the picture we actually have, out of 1.00: four questions, each answered as far as the source could answer it, less anything taken off for reading fewer reviews than we aim to.The reading206 people have rated this reading: enough to lean onThe second sourceHardcover knows this book, with 5 readers there: thinThe matchHow sure we are that the recording we scored is this book: as good as it getsThe reviewsWe read 300 reviews to judge how demanding it is: as good as it gets
What each crowd complains about
In the reviews we read, how often readers brought it up and how often listeners did, each against what is usual for that same crowd across our whole shelf, which is the grey tick. The track stops at 4×. Listeners are only ever compared with listeners.
Neither crowd brings any of the three up more often than its own crowd usually does. Whatever this book asks of you, its listeners are not saying the format is what makes it hard.
What the two crowds said
Showing the stars as each shop prints them. The two crowds are not measured from the same place: on our shelf Audible’s listeners average 0.35 of a star above Goodreads’ readers, so a recording that is ordinary for Audible can still out-star a book that is genuinely well liked for Goodreads. Switch the toggle to take that difference off.Showing each figure as its distance from its own crowd’s middle on our shelf, in standard deviations, so 0 is a typical book for that crowd. Listeners start 0.35 of a star up, partly because anyone who finishes a twenty-five-hour recording chose it deliberately, and this takes that off. It is not a claim that audio is better, the story figure is still Audible’s own (people rating a story they heard), and none of it moves the verdict above.
206 ratings of this readingstar chartstoo few to draw beside the book’s, and 250 is where we start trusting the shape
overallAudible
overall, pooled by the shop, so we hold no ruler for it
226 ratings · performance and story, as the shop pools them
the performanceAudible
the performance, against Audible’s own crowd
206 ratings
the story, as heardAudible
the story, as heard, against Audible’s own crowd
206 ratings
the book itselfGoodreads
the book itself, against Goodreads’ own crowd
3,231 ratings
Every reading we hold
One complete reading of this book, and it is the reading every audio figure above is measured on. If there is another, we have not found it. The shelf grows in reviewed batches, never because somebody searched for a book.
- Daniel Hawksfordthe one we measured9h 31m7h 37m6h 21m5h 26m4h 46m · One voice · Audible UK and US
Only 206 people have rated this reading, short of our published bar of 250, so we name it and print no scores for it.
Hear it · Audible’s clip, its length read from them on load
The recording these numbers came from
- Runtime
- 9h 31m at 1×
- Read by
- Daniel Hawksford
- Kind
- One voice
- ASIN
- B0CXFBK8TD · Audible UK
- Rated in
- Audible UK and US · 164 + 42 ratings of the performance
- Judged on
- 206 ratings of the narration
- Published
- Penguin · 2024
Too few people have rated this reading for us to call it our pick (our published bar is 250), so these are its details rather than a recommendation, and Audible sorts a search by newest, so check before you buy. The runtime is the check: if the one in front of you says 9h 31m, that is the reading these numbers describe. “Judged on” is the crowd behind every judgement we make about this reading: the smaller of the performance and story counts, which is why it is a little under the two shop counts added. We do not link out to a shop, and we take nothing if you buy there.