Prep Time 2012

cyptomcat--first man to become rich due to Internet argument?
 
dressedcheeseside said:
So with this myth debunked, does that automatically debunk it's ugly twin sister:

CPJ's offense is tougher to prepare for in 3 days than other, more common offenses?
How could it not?
Click to expand...

The numbers do not confirm that it's related to offense.

The numbers state very clearly that there's a 90% chance having an extra week helps folks vs GT than any other team, and that GT's strength of schedule over the last four years could not have been why the numbers are skewed.

gtzulu said:
I asked someone who knows much more about statistics than me, and they disagreed that a p-value of 0.10 was even "interesting" as I said before.
Click to expand...

Then you believe that EVERY FOOTBALL STATISTIC IS COMPLETELY WORTHLESS.

Coaches are hired and fired based on 4 years worth of win/loss records.

Therefore 4 years worth of win/loss records is the most important and significant statistic in all of football.
 
beej67 said:
The numbers state very clearly that there's a 90% chance having an extra week helps folks vs GT than any other team, and that GT's strength of schedule over the last four years could not have been why the numbers are skewed.
Click to expand...

Uh, no. Please read my post above on p-value misunderstandings.
 
gtzulu said:
Lies, ---- lies, and cyptomcat posts.

Teams played after extra preparation days are typically better teams. That's why it gets scheduled that way.
Click to expand...
1) not true,
2) debunked by comparing the analysis to an identical one done for any other ACC team, unless you claim that only Georgia Tech has a harder SOS than other ACC teams, which is
3) debunked by the vegas spread numbers and the vegas favorite numbers.

Pull your head out of the sand.
 
gtzulu said:
Your result is indeed remarkable from a betting perspective. p=0.2652e-04 is much lower than the usual significance cutoff. You'd think if Vegas was going to catch it they would have already caught it, and p wouldn't be so low. If preparation time isn't an input to their statistical models, the oddsmakers might totally miss the preparation time factor... :hsugh:

I think you're making the point though that if there were differences in GT's results against the spread just due to difference in opponent strength, Vegas would have already noticed. That is a good point, but I don't know, maybe we overestimate the oddsmakers' abilities. Are they really looking at GT specifically and finding the factors particular to GT that predict outcomes?
Click to expand...
I would say Vegas has definitely caught up to the bowl part of it.
08, their line was off by 39 points.
09, their line was off by 16 points.
10, their line was off by 10 points.
11, their line was off by 4 points.


gtzulu said:
cyptomcat--first man to become rich due to Internet argument?
Click to expand...
Several problems with it:
1. Too few extra time games to bet on. To get rich without much risk, you need several games to bet on per week.
2. I expect Vegas to have a better model for CPJ's GT as time goes on.
3. Vegas is rumored to follow 'sharp money' and adjust the lines after they open.
 
Do you seriously not think teams we play after longer breaks are on average better teams? :rolleyes: Bowls, for instance, are always played after longer breaks and they are always better than average teams.
 
gtzulu said:
Do you seriously not think teams we play after longer breaks are on average better teams? :rolleyes: Bowls, for instance, are always played after longer breaks and they are always better than average teams.
Click to expand...

Do you not realize that the data still holds even if we threw out all four bowls as outliers?
 
To summarize the different stats presented, with extra time against Tech:
1. GT offense does worse in the yards per play stat after adjusting for opponents' defense.
2. GT win-loss record is worse.
2a. GT win-loss record is worse when GT is favored to win.
2b. GT win-loss record is worse when GT is not favored to win.
3. GT win-loss record is worse against the spread.
4. GT scoring differential is worse after adjusting for the Vegas spread differential.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Ar8cqnkh36RRdENBQk1fRTYyRDFIVTdOa1Q0cXNrbGc&gid=3
 
Last edited:
cyptomcat said:
ok, how we did compared to the vegas line:
5-9 (.36) with extra prep for the opponent
18-11 (.62) with no extra prep for the opponent

and that takes into account everything we can possibly think of since it's by Vegas. Even the extra week, but I bet their extra week adjustment should be a lot different in our case compared to other teams' cases.

With extra time for opponent, we do on average 7.66 points worse than the Vegas spread.
With no extra time for opponent we do on average 3.39 points better than the Vegas spread.

I rest my case.

Link for data:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Ar8cqnkh36RRdENBQk1fRTYyRDFIVTdOa1Q0cXNrbGc&output=html
Click to expand...
This confirms what I figured, but how did other teams fair against the spread vs. BCS teams with or without extra time? As in, the rest of the ACC? This information is what I'd like to compare us to. I have no idea where ya'll get all this data with the past spreads, though.
 
gtzulu said:
Do you seriously not think teams we play after longer breaks are on average better teams? :rolleyes: Bowls, for instance, are always played after longer breaks and they are always better than average teams.
Click to expand...
and Vegas adjusts for that, so does my YPP analysis
 
cyptomcat said:
I think my link might have been broken, but in any case this one should work: (use the tabs on top for different spreadsheets)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Ar8cqnkh36RRdENBQk1fRTYyRDFIVTdOa1Q0cXNrbGc&output=html

2) The issue here is about 50 games, not a single game.

3) Vegas does normalize for other teams on average, that's the whole point.
Click to expand...

1) Ok, I'll check.

2) Right, but that single game was 25% of your data for extra-prep in 2011. The VPI game was another 25%. So 50% of the 2011 games in which there was extra prep had plausible explanations for the outcome other than extra-prep. You can't just show w-l or vegas Spread. You have to show causation not just correlation.

3) Quickly, you misunderstood my 3. I mean, you have to show that other teams don't have similar stats with respect to the vegas spread.
 
samsgt02 said:
This confirms what I figured, but how did other teams fair against the spread vs. BCS teams with or without extra time? As in, the rest of the ACC? This information is what I'd like to compare us to. I have no idea where ya'll get all this data with the past spreads, though.
Click to expand...
definitely a good question, I'll leave that to someone else to do. The evidence I have collected so far is convincing enough for me. If it's not for others, it is what it is.

A related look is looking at the bye week for SEC teams against other BCS teams. I have posted it several times already in this thread. It basically says bye week is not that useful. Vegas should have a lot more detailed look into bye week with personalization for coaches/teams and including a lot of game stats.

Mismatches where the team coming off the bye week was favored.

There were 40 such contests in the span I looked at, and the favored team coming off of a bye week went 34-6 (.850). In overall games from my last upset study, the favored team went 203-22 (.902). The sample set sizes are a bit different, so it may just be noise that favored teams ended up doing worse coming off of a bye week than overall games. Either way, it certainly not a clear advantage to be coming off of a bye week as the favored team.

The upsets, if you're curious, are as follows: 2002 South Carolina (5 wins) over Kentucky (7), 2003 Vanderbilt (2) over Kentucky (4), 2003 Florida (8) over LSU (13), 2003 Texas Tech (8) over Ole Miss (10), 2005 Tennessee (5) over LSU (11), and 2008 Tennessee (5) over Kentucky (7).

Mismatches where the team coming off the bye week was not favored.

There were 37 such contests in the span I looked at, and the underdogs coming off of bye weeks were 6-31 (.162). In overall games, underdogs were 22-203 (.098). The same caveat about sample size applies, so again, the difference could just be noise. Still, it would appear that there is some kind of advantage presented for underdogs coming off of bye weeks versus underdogs overall.

tossups
In tossups, we should see teams coming off of bye weeks winning more than half of the time if there really is some kind of advantage. Right? Right.

Unfortunately, that's not what the numbers say. Teams coming off of bye weeks in tossup games are just 13-19 (.406). At home, they're an even .500 (8-8) and on the road they're just 4-11 (.267). There was one neutral site tossup where Florida (9 wins) beat Georgia (10) in 2005, but D.J. Shockley's injury played a much bigger role in the Bulldogs' loss than UF's bye week did.
Click to expand...
http://www.teamspeedkills.com/2010/4/15/1424019/how-much-do-bye-weeks-matter
 
AE 87 said:
1) Ok, I'll check.

2) Right, but that single game was 25% of your data for extra-prep in 2011. The VPI game was another 25%. So 50% of the 2011 games in which there was extra prep had plausible explanations for the outcome other than extra-prep. You can't just show w-l or vegas Spread. You have to show causation not just correlation.

3) Quickly, you misunderstood my 3. I mean, you have to show that other teams don't have similar stats with respect to the vegas spread.
Click to expand...
2) When you go about game by game, you are going to find deeper explanations. Can you show that our injuries didn't happen because the defense was better prepared which put us into situations more likely to cause injury? Nesbitt injury was made more likely by a defensive play (interception) that could have been because of good film preparation on part of the defense.

Furthermore, I think it's very likely the injuries (via use of depth chart stats) is included in Vegas calculation of spreads. In other words, they likely have a probabilistic model of guys further in depth chart having to contribute time and the spread depends on that. Vegas employs statisticians and that's something I would include in my model if they were paying me for their lines.

3) I only have the SEC data from the side of teams having a bye week which supports my conclusion that GT is different from the average case. If you all want to do it for ACC from the side of the team facing extra prep for 2008-2011, I would love to have a look at it.

Here is something to get you started (it needs to be first made BCS only and then extended to also include 10 and 11)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Ar8cqnkh36RRdHBSTWJ6RTlRVGJRTmhZRjRSSko4bWc&output=html
 
cyptomcat said:
2) When you go about game by game, you are going to find deeper explanations. Can you show that our injuries didn't happen because the defense was better prepared which put us into situations more likely to cause injury? Nesbitt injury was made more likely by a defensive play (interception) that could have been because of good film preparation on part of the defense.
Click to expand...

We need to prove this, or just handwavingly point out a correlation. If we could 'link' extra prep time with increased incidence of injury, we could troll all of CFB. :lol:
 
ThisIsAtlanta said:
We need to prove this, or just handwavingly point out a correlation. If we could 'link' extra prep time with increased incidence of injury, we could troll all of CFB. :lol:
Click to expand...
It's not complete if it doesn't include number of pirates in the world.
 
cyptomcat said:
How am I stubbornly sticking to something when I am doing extra work and sharing it?

I think it's time for you all to do some of that if you are sincere about the discussion.

Spread/differential analysis will be the last thing I will do.
Click to expand...
I didn't say you are stubbornly sticking to something. I said "we", meaning I doubt many minds will change no matter what data you or anyone comes up with. It is interesting, though, and I don't mean to imply otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top