I can't believe most people put the conversion rate anywhere near 60%, stats from a normal 4th and 2 where the defense does not want to give up a big play are irrelevant. it is stop them from getting 2 yards or bust/ 0%, this is the same as a 2 point conversion with the way the defense played it, there is no comparison to.
-
Comment -
I had the Giants too but I remember there were many math gurus saying getting the Patriots at -500 was of big value because it should have been -900 therefore you were getting a good price. Someone forgot to tell the math gurus the games are played and won on the field.
Congrats on your Giants win!Comment -
If anyone is wondering, Pinny had the pats at -175 ML after the turnover on downs.Comment -
rofl colts win colts win colts winComment -
Lol, love all the comments. I still have to agree with Dilfer....no way should that ball had been snapped (trying a draw them off)...ya gotta punt from your own 28...bet if you asked BB today, he wouldn't say "I'd do it the same call again"...JMOComment -
What the math-only guys don't get:
One 4th down is not the other 4th down. Tonight's game, the MNF game between CLE and BAL, had a 4th down. lol It meant nothing. The game was already decided. But it goes on the stat list just the same. Do you even care if it was converted? I sure don't. Nor, I would assume, did many of the players on the field.
There are so many variables that go into each situation that it becomes ridiculous to rely on stats for this. A missed 4th and goal, with the lead and time running out, means nothing. Nor does it matter if it results in a TD.
Last night, the outcome mattered. Big time. So I hope that the academic research at the very least included the location on the field, the time left to play, a strength number for each offense and defense, as well as the score at the time of the 4th down.Comment -
All of the post game criticism of Belichick is proving even more what a genius move it was. Suppose he had punted and Manning would have led the Colts to a game winning TD (at least a 30% - 35% IMO). All the criticism now directed at him would have been directed at his defense. Their spirit would have been severely bruised, if not broken, and the season would likely have been lost.
Instead, all of the criticism is on him, and the defense can use the decision as a motivating factor for the rest of the year.
The guy is a genius. Pure genius.Comment -
Isn't the general theory here as long as I win it's ok? Never mind I have a better shot of winning if he does xxxx.....
I won last night's game despite the play (I had NE +2.5 and a minor on the ML)
I had baltimore giving 10.5....I'm sure if a backdoor 7 come up I would be pissed....
That doesn't make it a right/wrong play in itself.Comment -
colts win!!
Comment -
You go to work this morning...... your job is gone..... If you go for it you get a promotion 60% if you bitch about it your fired 40 % what do you do?Comment -
LOL.. Idiots still rampaging against the mathematical facts on here? Wow.. But not really that shocked considering the state of handicapping on these forums.Comment -
Thankfully for me the drexel coach does not understand 4th grade math either. You are almost +500 to win the game and you play your best player 4 minutes because of 2 fouls.
Comment -
QUESTION: if this was a playoff game, would the patriots have gone for it on 4th down on their own 28, or would they have forced the colts to try to drive the whole field and win the game?
if anybody thinks the answer to this is go for it, you do not understand the fundamentals of football..
heres a simple analogy: everybody plays a game of poker differently when there is money on the line, as opposed to having less to lose. bill knew that even if they lose the game, its just one hand. there is no way he goes ALL IN with those cards in a playoff game.Comment -
any1 who thinks them going for it 4th and 2 instead of punting is a complete idiot and doesn't know the game!Comment -
Shutup you retarded monkey. You never won anything. All you did was prove you have 0 football common sense. Give it a rest u book worm. Go back to math class. In the NFL you punt on 4th and 2 from your own 28. I don't want to discuss the 1000 different variables of what could have happened with you. I don't even hate the call, just stop acting like it was the obvious call and this should be the new trend.Comment -
Fish, You can repeat it a million times, you're wrong everytime.Comment -
To take another page from poker, you shouldn't use results oriented analysis to decided if Bellicheat was right or wrong in his play call like people in this thread are trying to do. Saying he's wrong because they lost is like saying an all-in play with AA is wrong if you get busted by 72o. The math is there, AA was statistically the better hand and should win more often than not.
This situation is no different.....Comment -
Yea, that's the spirit! Stop thinking and do what has always been done.
In the heat of the moment it may not have been the obvious call, but if you look at the math it is.
It should be the new trend, unless coaches are content with not maximizing their chances of winning games. Look at poker, the game is fluid with today's "style" being different from the game played 10 years ago. You can make that argument for most sports as fundamental strategies change, and it's only a matter of time before coaches embrace it or lose out.Comment -
I've been thinking a little bit about where conventional wisdom in football comes from to punt the ball in these situations. In the early days of football, it was extremely difficult to score and field position was consequently extremely important. When a game is 3-0 instead of 35-34, punting is absolutely the right call in that and many other situations. However, as offenses have gotten better over the years, field position is no longer anywhere near as important as it used to be and possession is the biggest thing these days. However, the conventional wisdom from years past still lingers in people's minds as it is difficult to change the status quo. Sprinkle in a bit of confirmation bias when the correct move is made and doesn't pan out and you get this thread.Comment -
This situation is no different.....
umm... Yes it is. TOTALLY DIFFERENT. The whole poker analogy was way off base actually. AA pre-flop statistically is the best hand, This is a FACT, not an opinion like everything else in this thread. Given the opportunity you shove AA pre-flop every time. 4th and 2 from your own 28 is NOT POCKET ACES, NOT EVEN CLOSE. The decision to go for it here was a coinflip proposition at best imo. and IN MY OPINION the correct call was to punt. I would be saying he shoulda punted even if he made it.Comment -
Now that I'm thinking about it again that move was 3X more dumb than I thought originally. Even if he converted the 4th and 2 from 28 yard line he still couldn't run out the clock because the Colts had their time outs. He would have probably faced 4th and long with about 30-40 seconds from about the same spot. Would he have gone for it in that scenario again or would he have punted since there was less time left?
Comment -
Have you math guys ever heard of DEFENSE!!!!!!!!!!!! IT CHANGES YOUR STUPID LIL EQUATION. Stop comparing it to fukin POKER. I'm done. Somebody else talk to the math geeks for a while. If you had played sports before you guys would get it. The inability to at least see and comprehend the other side of this argument is what is mind boggling to me. There are 2 sides to every argument. Open your fukin ears.Comment -
I think the stats you need to compare to is 4th and 2 from own 28 yard line with 1:57 left and being up by 6 points. Any other stat involving a 4th and 2 which happened in the past without the exact parameters is irrelevant.Comment -
Nothing changes the equation. The only thing that changes are your inputs.[Bump this thread into the "Nominated Posts" forum! Bumping this post will create a new thread highlighting a good post that deserves to be seen. SBR staff or users may award points for appreciated contributions.] Report Post
Have you math guys ever heard of DEFENSE!!!!!!!!!!!! IT CHANGES YOUR STUPID LIL EQUATION. Stop comparing it to fukin POKER. I'm done. Somebody else talk to the math geeks for a while. If you had played sports before you guys would get it. The inability to at least see and comprehend the other side of this argument is what is mind boggling to me. There are 2 sides to every argument. Open your fukin ears.Comment -
The specific hands are irrelevant, I oversimplified to help people like you understand. Did you even read my post? I didn't say the decision was like AA vs 72 in any way. I said judging his decision based on the outcome is like judging the move with AA losing. One decision is more likely to result in a win than the other, and even if you disagree on which is more likely to win in this case you can't argue that it was wrong because it results in the Pats losing (or AA losing).
For shits and giggles, substitute JJ losing to TT and the same point applies. AJs losing to AJo and the same point applies.. Even if it's a small percentage, it's still statistically the right call. Unlike football, we can calculate the probabilities with absolute certainty, and is completely applicable to my example of not using results oriented analysis. It is not applicable to what you interpreted my post to be, I won't disagree with that.
At last, your chance to shine.... how did YOU come up with your probability of coinflip at best. Show your work and you might be surprised.Comment -
Do you even know the equations being used? How does defense change the equation... To me the probability of the Pats stopping Colts is considered, and the probability of colts stopping the pats on 4th and 2 is also considered. What are we missing? Your insight would be appreciated, but of course you'll back down from this and say math doesn't matter, blah blah blah.
Please have your mom reread my post to you and try to listen to her. I didn't say you are wrong or Bellicheat is right, I was saying that you can't decide that based on whether he won or lost. Your inability to read beyond the level of a sexually abused circus monkey is mind boggling to me as well, but people on the internet never cease to amaze me.
Here is the point: you simply can't say the math is wrong because they are too close to the endzone. I think you can argue that they are too close to take a risk and forgo the statistical advantage, but that doesn't make the math wrong. It just means you think there is a reason to ignore it.
Eyes maybe? Try taking your own ****ing advice and actually reading what you are posting about and you won't appear to be such a dbag.
Comment
