- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Going for 2 in that situation.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:11 pm to TheSexecutioner
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:11 pm to TheSexecutioner
If you are in a situation where attempting something increases your chances of success from 50% to 70% by achieving the goal and only decreases to 45% if you don’t achieve it, you’d do it every time. That’s for anything, not just football.
This post was edited on 1/22/24 at 1:24 pm
1
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:12 pm to slackster
quote:
But other types of momentum, like the hot hand in the NBA or something, is patently false.
Confidence is a big part of shooting. I feel the same way about golf. If you have confidence, you're more likely to succeed on any given shot.
If you've had 5 great shots in a row, confidence is high, thus more likely to succeed.
Maybe people just conflate confidence with momentum.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:12 pm to Gordon Hayward
quote:
This is so stupid its unfathomable.
this thread is a good example that MSB posters are the only people dumber than NFL coaches when it comes to analytics.
the math is overwhelmingly in favor of going for 2. so much so that even the most stubborn coaches realize it is so much of a mathematical advantage that it makes you an idiot to not go for 2 after scoring a td to cut the lead to 8.
"Chris didn't go through all the math on tv because it's a little too much to explain on tv. I will assume it's 50% on the 2-pt conversion to simplify the math but as was said on the broadcast it's about 55%
Assume the bucs score two tds:
95% they make both fgs: multiply by 50% when you go to OT. 47% chance of winning
Go for two:
get the two points conversion on the first try. Kick the FG on the second. 50% of the time you win.
Miss the first 2 point conversion. Make the second one. 50% * 50% ~ 25% of the time you go to OT. And 50/50 shot there. = 12.5% win 12.5 % loss
Miss both 2 pt conversions 50%*50% 25% loss
Final tally you have 62.5% chance of a win and a 37.5% chance to lose. And it's actually slight better because it's more likely to get the 2 pt conversion."
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:13 pm to TheSexecutioner
Maybe one of the most idiotic statements I’ve ever read here. So many people claiming they favor the math while proposing scenarios where you’d be in the lowest success rate possible.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:16 pm to DownSouthCrawfish
quote:
I think it’s going to take a few more years before I accept the analytical approach over the common sense approach in football. Just take the xp.
My brother in Christ, the mathematical approach IS the common sense approach. Math skills are our best measurable indicator of a person’s rational and logical prowess.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:17 pm to Madking
if the goal was to tie then kicking the XP would be a viable option. since the goal is to win, you go for 2, which gives you a chance to win the game in regulation, while still keeping the OT option alive.
your odds of winning the game are higher going for 2. it really is that simple.
your odds of winning the game are higher going for 2. it really is that simple.
This post was edited on 1/22/24 at 1:18 pm
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:21 pm to xenythx
quote:
The problem often with these analytics is it requires you and your opponent to do the expected thing every time over a large sample of games before you would even see any sort of significant advantage.
The other problem is the analytics don't account for human nature. I'm sure Detroit's players felt a whole lot more comfortable with a 31-23 lead than they would have at 31-24.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:22 pm to VADawg
Big yikes.
Now we are introducing anecdotal evidence that we made up in our heads.
Now we are introducing anecdotal evidence that we made up in our heads.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:24 pm to Corinthians420
But it isn’t, you’re using incomplete data.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:25 pm to Madking
quote:
Maybe one of the most idiotic statements I’ve ever read here. So many people claiming they favor the math while proposing scenarios where you’d be in the lowest success rate possible.
I've never seen someone more hopelessly confused than you on the game thread yesterday. It was truly something to behold.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:27 pm to tigerinthebayou
quote:That's actually the worst thing you could do
Kick the extra point and if you score again THEN you decide if you want to go for 2 and the win or kick the extra point. But to make yourself now have to get a 2 pt conversion just to tie is stupid.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:29 pm to castorinho
quote:
That's actually the worst thing you could do
Meh, its tied with just kicking the extra point on both. Probably a hair better for most teams. But essentially the same.
Going for 2 on the second TD and kicking the PAT on both are around 50%.
Going for 2 on the first TD is 62.5%. Thats why its so clearly mathematical correct.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:31 pm to TheSexecutioner
You must not be reading your own posts then because you look like a degenerate fool.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:35 pm to TheSexecutioner
Extra point conversion rate since 2015 when it was moved back has hovered around 94%.
.94 x 1 point per = .94 EPA
2 point conversion rate is around 47.5%
.475 x 2 points per = .95 EPA
In this situation it was the right call but you could actually argue going for 2 every single time is the right call.
.94 x 1 point per = .94 EPA
2 point conversion rate is around 47.5%
.475 x 2 points per = .95 EPA
In this situation it was the right call but you could actually argue going for 2 every single time is the right call.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:36 pm to castorinho
These math geniuses don’t even understand exposure. It’s comical watching them pose as intelligent just because they parrot talking points put out by the very people whose job is to take their money.
This post was edited on 1/22/24 at 1:40 pm
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:36 pm to Madking
quote:
But it isn’t, you’re using incomplete data.
here is the formula. put in your own data if you want.
LINK
the buccs kicker makes 98.3% of his XPs. The buccs converted 50% of the 2 pt conversions this year.
Chances of winning using conventional strategy (EP first, go for 2 on 2nd TD if it misses): 48.7%
Chanced of winning if going for 2 first: 62%
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:37 pm to Madking
Whose
Now you get a lesson in math and English in the same thread
Now you get a lesson in math and English in the same thread
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:39 pm to Corinthians420
Like I said very limited data
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:39 pm to slackster
nobody is surprised with this "I am smarter than everyone here" comment.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:39 pm to Madking
I don't think you understand what analytics means or is. Yesterday, you wrote this......
I can't begin to understand what you think analytics is to say something that stupid.
Every single explanation that someone has tried to give has taken downside into account. You are too illiterate to understand them. But not a single person appealing to the math thinks that being down by 8 is as good as being down by 7 or that it isn't necessary to account for that.
quote:
The nerds chirping about analytics are ignorant, analytics never takes downside into account.
I can't begin to understand what you think analytics is to say something that stupid.
Every single explanation that someone has tried to give has taken downside into account. You are too illiterate to understand them. But not a single person appealing to the math thinks that being down by 8 is as good as being down by 7 or that it isn't necessary to account for that.
Page 4 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News