You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]


Six contenders but the Storm, Sharks or Sea Eagles will win in 2017

Come next Thursday all eyes will be back on the 2017 NRL Premiership. Barring major injuries, there are six sides that could possibly win the title: the Cowboys, Broncos, Rosters, Sea Eagles, Sharks and the Storm.

However, when you look at the stats it becomes clear that the current top three are the sides most likely.

When all the statistical categories are examined they average out the best.

Metres gained and conceded

Team

Metres Gained

Rank

Metres conceded

Rank

=/-

Sharks

1506

2nd

1365

5th

+141

Cowboys

1472

4th

1333

3rd

+139

Sea Eagles

1374

13th

1306

1st

+68

Broncos

1519

1st

1464

14th

+55

Storm

1428

8th

1393

7th

+35

Roosters

1452

5th

1454

13th

-2

NRL Avg

1404

1404

As you can see, the Cowboys and the Sharks have the best metres gained to conceded aggregate. Those metres alone go a long way to winning a lot of games.

While the Sea Eagles have a +68 aggregate, they don’t make enough metres to be genuine contenders even though their defence is superb. The Broncos are great at gaining metres but very good at conceding them, which isn’t ideal. The Roosters also concede far too many metres.

There’s the Storm almost bang on average for metres gained and conceded. However, they are on the happy side of the average in both categories.

Attacking stats

Team

Tries scored

Rank

Line Breaks

Rank

Tackle Breaks

Rank

Storm

70

1st

83

1st

469

5th

Sea Eagles

65

2nd

71

3rd

398

10th

Roosters

60

5th

66

5th

419

7th

Broncos

58

7th

61

8th

502

3rd

Sharks

54

9th

69

4th

412

8th

Cowboys

54

9th

59

9th

482

4th

NRL Avg

55

61

422

These stats really start sorting out the sheep from the goats. In regards to effective attack the Storm are towering above the other contenders. Only the Sea Eagles are close to them in regards to tries scored but, as we’ve seen above, their metres gained are well below par and they are the worst of this bunch for tackle breaks.

(AAP Image/Paul Miller)

The Roosters stats are ok. With a bit of improvement their attack could become quite deadly.

The Broncos, Sharks and Cowboys aren’t scoring enough tries. However, as we’ve seen time and again, if a side’s defence is good enough they can still grind out wins.

Defence

Team

Tries conceded

Rank

Line breaks conceded

Rank

Missed Tackles

Rank

Missed Tackle %

Penalties conceded

rank

Sharks

39

1st

42

1st

450

13th

8.8%

110

2nd

Storm

42

2nd

43

2nd

409

6th

7.4%

119

1st

Sea Eagles

46

3rd

48

4th

384

3rd

8.6%

107

3rd

Cowboys

49

5th

68

12th

447

12th

9.3%

92

11th

Roosters

50

6th

63

9th

421

8th

7.6%

93

10th

Broncos

51

7th

55

7th

481

15th

9.1%

81

14th

NRL Avg

55

61

422

96

As you can see, tries conceded is a huge factor in being successful. The six contenders are only interrupted by the Bulldogs ranked fourth best for tries conceded. However, the Storm, Sharks and the Sea Eagles are the best.

Why are these three so much better than the others? Firstly, their missed tackle percentages are better. However, the main reason is their penalties conceded.

They are the three most penalised sides in the NRL so far this season. When their line is threatened they conceded a penalty to give themselves more time to reset their defence.

While there have been 28 sin binnings so far this season – 11 more already than for all of 2016 – only one (Clay Priest, Raiders, Round 1) has been for repeated infringements. The rest have all been for punching or professional fouls.

Basically, the Sea Eagles, Storm and Sharks called Archer’s bluff. They knew his refs didn’t feel even vaguely supported enough by their hierarchy to do something as controversial as sin bin for repeated offences.

That those three sides concede the least tries is no coincidence. And the NRL hierarchy know it and allow it.

Why? Who the hell knows! But sides are being allowed to cheat and their reward is a spot in the top four.

It once more raises the curious case of James Maloney. In 14 games so far this season Maloney has already conceded 24 penalties. At this rate he will break 40 penalties for the season. He has not been out of the top three most penalised players for the past five years. However, he has not been sin binned once.

Does that make the referees stupid or gutless? Or both?

Whatever… Jimmy Maloney is laughing! And the message is clear: do what it takes to hold your line. Lie on the player, go the third man flop, pull a leg, put hands on the ball, rake the ball out, pick a fight. You might be penalised but you are almost certain not to be sin binned – and you probably won’t let in a try!

Repeat sets

Team

Drop outs taken

Rank

Drop outs forced

Rank

Dropout aggregate +/-

Errors

Rank

Sea Eagles

29

12th

35

2nd

+6

139

1st

Cowboys

24

7th

36

1st

+12

157

7th

Broncos

27

10th

29

5th

+2

151

4th

Storm

25

8th

22

11th

-3

174

13th

Sharks

17

3rd

30

4th

+13

190

16th

Roosters

20

5th

24

9th

+4

182

15th

NRL Avg

25

25

162

The side that best controls the ball most often wins. Further, a side that can force repeat sets on top of that is in a great position. Given those concepts it is easy to see why the Sea Eagles are ensconced in the top three. However, that the Storm and Sharks are well down the list for these stats indicate that they may not be as vital as all that.

Playmakers
A side that has the most effective and settled combinations has a huge advantage over other sides. Which of the top six is best off?

Play maker 1

Play maker 2

Play maker 3

Play maker 4

Total

Storm

Billy SlaterLine break assists – 11
Try assists – 12

Cooper Cronk
Line break assists – 7
Try assists – 11

Cameron Munster
Line break assists – 13
Try assists – 8

Cameron Smith
Line break assists – 6
Try assists – 5

Line break assists – 37
Try assists – 36

Sea Eagles

Daly Cherry Evans
Line break assists – 11
Try assists – 13

Tom Trbojevic
Line break assists – 7
Try assists – 7

Dylan Walker
Line break assists – 6
Try assists – 7

Blake Green
Line break assists – 5
Try assists – 5

Line break assists – 29
Try assists – 32

Roosters

Luke Keary
Line break assists – 11
Try assists – 13

Mitchell Pearce
Line break assists – 7
Try assists – 10

Latrell Mitchell
Line break assists – 5
Try assists – 5

Michael Gordon
Line break assists – 4
Try assists – 3

Line break assists – 27
Try assists – 31

Broncos

Anthony Milford
Line break assists – 7
Try assists – 10

Darius Boyd
Line break assists – 8
Try assists – 7

Ben Hunt
Line break assists – 5
Try assists – 6

Benji Marshall
Line break assists – 4
Try assists – 2

Line break assists – 24
Try assists – 25

Cowboys

Michael Morgan
Line break assists – 4
Try assists – 10

John Asiata
Line break assists – 2
Try assists – 5

Jake Granville
Line break assists – 2
Try assists – 4

Lachlan Coote
Line break assists – 6
Try assists – 3

Line break assists – 14
Try assists – 22

Sharks

Ricky Leutele
Line break assists – 5
Try assists – 5

Chad Townsend
Line break assists – 4
Try assists – 5

Valentine Holmes
Line break assists – 5
Try assists – 4

James Maloney
Line break assists – 5
Try assists – 4

Line break assists – 19
Try assists – 18

When it comes to settled and effective combinations the Storm are way out in front.

Surprisingly Slater is their lead creator so far this year, just in front of Cronk.

The Sea Eagles combination of Daly Cherry-Evans and Turbo Tom Trbojevic is working out very well, and is supported ably by Walker and Green.

Luke Keary and Mitchell Pearce have quickly formed a good combination and operate well behind a strong pack.

The Broncos are suffering from issues with form and injury, but there is lots of quality in their playmakers.

The Cowboys are adjusting quickly to life without Johnathan Thurston, with Michael Morgan taking the reins. However, they are some huge shoes to fill.

Then we come to the Sharks playmakers. Who knew Ricky Leutele was their most effective ballplayer so far this season. There is plenty of room for improvement here.

Results against top eight sides
Beating bottom eight sides can be like chasing Uder from the Simpsons: easy. The form of flat track bullies isn’t really relevant to the pointy end of the season. The real test comes when you have to play the other top sides.

Team

Played vs top 8

Won

Lost

Storm

8/16

6

2

Sharks

9/16

5

4

Roosters

7/16

4

3

Sea Eagles

7/15

3

4

Broncos

7/16

3

4

Cowboys

7/16

2

5

This table shows that the Storm know how to win the big games. Their loss to the Roosters was without many of their stars. Their loss to the Sharks in Round 6 was a tough one and they were missing Munster and Jesse Bromwich.

The verdict
If you average out each sides overall rank for each of these categories it looks like this:

Average rank

Storm

2.33

Sea Eagles

2.5

Sharks

3.33

Cowboys

4.1

Roosters

4.33

Broncos

4.33

So the top three are justified in their spots, with the Storm the stand out among them.

Given this, the good money must be on the Storm being the first losing grand finalist to win the following year since the Manly Warringah Sea Eagles prevailed in 2008 – over the Storm.

And there’s a good chance it will be against the Sharks.

Tim Gore

Tim has been an NRL statistician for ABC Radio Grandstand since 1999, primarily as part of their Canberra coverage. Tim has loved rugby league since Sterlo was a kid with lots of hair but was cursed with having no personal sporting ability whatsoever. He couldn't take a hit in footy, was a third division soccer player making up numbers, plays off 41 in golf and is possibly the world's worst cricketer ever. He has always been good at arguing the point though and he has a great memory of what happened. Follow Tim on Twitter.

The New South Wales State of Origin team for the 2018 series remains a mystery, with new coach Brad Fittler facing plenty of selection headaches. So we want you to tell us - and all your mates - who should start for Blues in Game 1 with our team picker.

Hey Tim, remember last year with i wrote an article based on past stats that Manly would make this years grand final???. It would be expected yet a little weird that they make it again this year. To refresh your memory.

You laughed at me, you all laughed at me, well who is laughing now!!! Well nobody yet, i not really looking forward to the i told you so moment, but if its a 2007 grand final rematch with the same result ill take it. Go the Storm!!!!!!!!

Just when my opinion of you could not get any lower your also an Alanis Morissette fan. I cant stand that bloody stupid song. But its a fantastic coincidence that they make the grand final in 77, 87, 97 and 07. Just going with the pattern Barry. Have a nice day

After reading most of the pre-season that Manly were bottom 4 certainties, with many saying they’d “win” the spoon, I’m just glad to be reading a stats report, after 17 rounds, giving them a chance for the premiership.

Barrettt has done a sensational job with the squad at his disposal, given the significant chunk of salary cap cash on the sidelines before a ball was kicked.

Whatever happens Manly can call this a successful year. I don’t think they’ll be in the running for the premiership (they’ll need a lot of luck), but with such a young squad likely to be together for years, I don’t think one is far off.

I agree EJ. There’s still a lot of the season to go. It would be a big call to say Manly will win the comp – they’ve had some good wins; against the Cowboys up North e.g., but the Cows were off that night. I wouldn’t call the Boys the most dominant side in the competition today – they let in 16 easy points in the first 20 minutes last weekend against the Warriors. You don’t do that if you’re the best side out there. But I agree with you that will instill fear within a year or two. The Sharkies are very strong and Melbourne play a beautiful game.

I agree that it would be a big call for Manly to win. But H.Y. you’re using double standards here.

What other team hasnt leaked points badly at certain times this season at certain times. And saying Manly won against North Queensland because NQ were off the boil, denies Manly the credit that they outplayed them with Thurston on the field in NQ, something few sides have done in recent years. They probably would have beaten any side that day.

Using the same argument you could say the Storm met a Manly side off the boil, when they ran roughshod in the first half, then almost lost the game when Manly came back at them. The Storm led 30-12 just before half time in their game before Manly came back to lose 30-26, and almost pipped the opposition with a final minutes that almost won Manly the game. What of Manly’s defeat of the Roosters, their thrashing of the Sharks both away. The same Sharks side that they beat 35-18, then thrashed the Roosters 44-12 the following week. Did Manly win because the opposition werent playing well. No doubt SOO will come up as an excuse.

Every team has on games and off games. Qualifying that a team won because the opposition were off the boil to exemplify a belief that the winners have somehow been fortunate is selective interpretation. If they win, they are good enough full stop.

Hey EJ – I’ll put my hand up and admit to being one of those that thought the Eagles were a bottom four club.

Happy to admit I was wrong. Happy to go one step further and say they’re one of the best teams in the comp to watch. Koroisau is looking more and more settled at 9. DCE is the form player of the comp. Walker is getting back to his best form from 2014. They’ve done it largely without Turbo so having him back could really kick them along.

Lussick has cut some rubbish out of his game. Jurbo is as good a front on hitter as there’s been in twenty years plus has ball skills at the line. Taupau is always fun to watch.

One query is the edge backrowers, particularly with Sironen out. Winterstein and Wallace don’t look great, particularly considering Wallace is ranked behind L Brown. I think when the Stewart and Masai millions are feeed up that Barrett will be going hard for a backrower – surprised they didn’t have a big dip for Gillett earlier in the year.

Not sure they will go all the way this season because of a couple of weak spots in their team that is think might get found out in semi final footy. But I’ll be happy to admit if I get that wrong too. One thing you know about Manly is they’re never down for long.

These sorts of seasons that come off the back of 1-2 poorer seasons are probably the most enjoyable.

Anyway, fair point, Sirro a massive loss and the Eagles aren’t deep for backup forwards and outside backs. It’s one reason why Taufua is such a big loss – gets the side moving from own half. Wright might land a few more goals but I’d rather Jorge in the big games.

Just on Jurbo – I don’t reckon I’ve ever seen him turned on his back. Will pay closer attention v Storm in the coming weeks…

EJ – I’d be hoping that Manly give it a good shake this year. Manly are currently on a roll and there is nothing like confidence and momentum. You can’t buy these two ingredients. Everybody expected the Raiders to build on their success in 2016 this season but it just hasn’t happened. Sometimes the planets align and you are provided with an opportunity that needs to be taken.

I love a good stat, who doesn’t but just going off the old eye test, I think the Cows are a massive show with Morgs and Martin in our halves! In all seriousness, Storm are going to go very close, like they do every year. Slater is a massive in for them from last year. Sharks, Roosters, Cows and Donkeys are also going to give it a shake. I just don’t think Manly have the forward firepower come September but who knows. Should be a cracking end to the season!

I’d be interested to see how the West Tigers stats stacked up , Pre 2005 grand final ?
Stats are fine , but they give a 100% definitive outcome.
Some teams peak at the right time , im hoping the Roosters are that team this year , because if a grand final was played this week they would be no where near winning it.