Theres only one prize. But if there was more than one prize to give out, but extra prizes if they were given out would go to say 'most improved console manufacturer' or something like that

Right on all counts--excellent post.

I'm not disagreeing - it's just a mental thing for me.

alright :)

I see a tie

No - If one is higher than the other, it won

thers no such things as ties in console wars ps3s goal is to beat the 360 this gen and i feel it could do it in all 3 regions let alone WW every little advantage helps

also will vgc be dong any adjustments to DEC sales seeing they have ps3 for all of americas not just usa at 1.31 wen npd shows just 50 states to be 1.36

im pretty sure something like this happened in NOV sales vgc showed ps3 ahead of 360 but that wasnt the case according to npd then i pretty sure vgc adjusted nov sales having the 360 ahead of the ps3

alot could be on the line here if vgc decides to increases ps3 sales it could end up doing 1 mill 2 times in a week ww instead of none

The question totally misses the point in general.

In a statistical tie, the numbers ARE equal. One number isn't higher then the other.  1.31 and 1.36 are the same number.

It'd be like asking whish number is higher

.99999~ or 1

.9999999~ = 1 despite the fact that 1 looks higher.

They're the same number... period.

Numbers given with a margin of error aren't "real" numbers.  They're the middle point expression of a possible range of numbers.

To say statistical ties don't matter is basically to say what NPD does is meaningless since you are disregarding the foundation on which said numbers are built.

It would be like saying you don't think the basic laws of physics are important but then taking physisits findings serious.  It's incongruent with logic.

Uh, no.  "Statistical tie" is the more generally used equivalent of a "statisitically insignificant difference" (the statistics term).  The numbers are not necessarily equal.  Rather, their ranges overlap.  In statistics, the probability that the number you got is actually the exact correct value is infinitesimally small.  Ranges are much more valuable, as they can represent a set of values that there is a 90%, 95%, 97%, etc. chance that the real value is in.  Now, if we assume there is a + or - 5% margin of error with 95% confidence, a difference of 3.84% is very small.  It's a fact that there is a statistically insignificant difference, and while it's true that it's more likely that the PS3 won, the chance that the X360 won isn't that small.  It'd take some integration to figure out the exact value without the data, but it's probably somewhere between 20-35%. 

The numbers are equal for all intensive purposes.  Since you have no clue who the "winner" is.  They would be considered equal in any study that produced them because no meaningful conclusion could be drawn from them.

Furthermore, NPD isn't the only numbers we have... we also have Vgchartz numbers which have 360 ahead of PS3... which further "pulls down" the probability of the PS3 beating the 360.

To say won beat the other is to disregard the process which built the numbers... meaning the numbers themselves are meaningless.

One can not logically state the PS3 beat the 360. (or vice versa for that matter.)

VGC... the same VGC that significantly undertracked the ps3 by 500k in '07? Yeah... I remember that. Everyone thought 360 won but after the major adjustment s3 pulled ahead.