Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1290275
10 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 20 SEPTEMBER 2020 Raphael Vassallo OPINION 'Never tell me the odds'… YOU might recognise that as a line from 'The Empire Strikes Back': the second film in the original Star Wars trilogy (and, in my humble opinion, easily the best instalment of the entire franchise). It is spoken by Han Solo, after C3PO informs him that (all to- gether, now): "Sir! The possibility of suc- cessfully navigating an asteroid field is approximately 3,720 to 1!" Do I need to continue? Even if you haven't watched the film, you will surely guess that Han Solo not only 'successfully' (quite easily, in fact) navigates that asteroid field, despite such overwhelming odds… but he also goes on to survive being frozen in carbonite (R2D2 es- timates the chances at 750-1), and by the end of the trilogy he also single-handedly over- throws the combined might of the entire Galactic Empire, armed only with his trusty blaster-pistol (OK, OK, maybe the Ewoks did help a little. And so did the 'Walking Carpet'. But you know what I mean…) Seriously, folks: what are the odds of even the least of those things actually happening in real life? I'd say: about as re- mote and unlikely as that 'oth- er galaxy, long, long ago'. But in the Star Wars uni- verse? Totally different scenar- io. In this context, the chances of 'successfully navigating an asteroid field' have to be meas- ured against another, very dif- ferent set of statistical proba- bilities. What are the chances that George Lucas would create a movie franchise in which the most charismatic protagonist by far – the 'lovable scoundrel' we've all been rooting for from the very beginning, no less – gets himself suddenly (and inexplicably) killed less than halfway through the second film? And in the most boring, mundane way imaginable, too: by simply crashing the Millen- nium Falcon headlong into a rock? And even then: what are the chances that the resulting film would go on to spawn one of the most enduring, successful and beloved movie franchises of all time…? Never mind '3,720 to 1'. The odds of such a thing happening would be too astronomical for even C3PO to ever compute. As Yoda himself might put it: 'Not even possible, it is…' So why even bring it up at all, you might be asking? Let's just say that, if you take the above scenario only as a pos- sible model for the calcula- tion of 'odds' in general – you know, the sort of calculation that bookies and online betting agencies engage with on a dai- ly basis – you will realise that it also applies to pretty much every other statistical probabil- ity you care to name. There is always a superfi- cial mathematical operation at work – represented here by C3PO's '3,720-1' prediction – but there will always be a wider context that, when also fac- tored into the math, might give a very different final result. In this case, the external fac- tor is the 100% certainty we all instinctively feel, when watch- ing the film for the first time, that: yes, of course Han Solo will 'successfully navigate the asteroid field'; just as he'll also kill all the bad guys, save the entire Universe from destruc- tion, and 'get the girl' in end. It is, after all, just another action movie… In other scenarios, it might be something considerably dif- ferent; and my guess is that in ALL real-life scenarios, with- out exception, the variation in the final result will be nowhere near as predictable as it is in the 'Star Wars' model. But still: it will always be there. And just to prove this little hy- pothesis of mine, I am now go- ing to apply it to another set of odds: those of Adrian Delia ac- tually beating Bernard Kenobi… I mean, Grech…. in the ongoing Nationalist Party leadership light-sabre duel, now set to take place on October 3. Luckily, someone has already calculated those odds for us (and boy, must Adrian Delia be praying that they are about as accurate as C3PO's, above). I have to stress that this was over two weeks ago – i.e., be- fore Bernard Grech's 'unpaid taxes' revelations, which may have tilted the balance slight- ly – but around the end of last month, a local online betting site was offering 1.1 odds on Bernard Grech… and 6.0 odds on Adrian Delia. As betting odds go: that's pretty darn overwhelming. The way it was reported at the time: "if you bet €1 on Grech win- ning, you'll only get €1.10 in return. In comparison, should Delia win, you'll be getting €6 in return, clear proof of the lev- el of confidence currently held by the online bookmakers." Then again, however: that's just the surface-level calcula- tion… and we don't need to look very far to see what sort of factors it was based on, either. Just a couple of weeks ear- lier – i.e., before Grech even announced his candidacy – a MaltaToday poll had revealed that: "Bernard Grech enjoys the highest trust level among Nationalist Party members and is considered the person best suited to bring about unity"… having achieved a high score of 63.1%, compared to Delia's meagre 23.3%. Much the same results were reflected in all initial polls and surveys after the candidates were announced; and I imagine that the betting agency itself would have conducted a little research of its own (just as it is probably revising its calcula- tions even now, on the basis on each new development). But… how much do we really know about the wider context? What other factors might be underpinning this particular calculation? For starters, all those 'surveys and polls' I just mentioned – including our own – don't actu- ally count for much, when you consider that the choice itself will not be made by the wider electorate as a whole… or even just the 130,000 who voted PN at the last election… but by the party's paid-up members: a much smaller coterie of around 22,000 at the last count. And with some exceptions – such as the estimated 600 new members who have enrolled since Bernard Grech entered the race – they are roughly the same people who original- ly elected Adrian Delia as PN leader, only three short years ago. From their perspective, then, the calculation can already be seen to be slightly different