The problem with academic articles on specific sports is that it is generally assumed the author understands the sport, because he has researched it. In all likelihood, he has only a surface understanding, in which case he will start out from a wrong foundation, yet provide a 'scientific' basis by using all the right jargon. (I recently came across nonsensical references to hockey and soccer that fit that mold. Why get into endless discussions to point out the mistakes? If people want to use the wrong information, let them. How else do you think sports bettors make their money?). The guys that did make a difference, the sabermetricians in baseball, knew everything about the sport. The field of horse racing has produced plenty of insightful books, and I believe it is because the juice starts out at -120. It would require expertise just to play even. In fact, I may publish a book about horse racing. lol