All Forums | NFL Betting

Stop with the emotions and look at the math....Belichick made the right call

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 6712
Posts: 111
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2007
Posts: 74
Posted: #26
This is one of the best most well thought out posts I have ever seen on this site, but because it causes people to think outside the box, most are missing the wisdom of it.  Maybe if we look at this question from a more personal gambling viewpoint we can see it more clearly.

If you had a moneyline bet on Indy in this game would you have wanted the Pats to punt and give Manning a sure chance at winning it for you, or would you have preferred them to go for the two yards and have a more than 50% chance of not giving Manning the ball at all?  I know for a fact I would not have wanted them to go for it- I want to make sure I have the chance to have my great QB win the game for me.  As a bettor I want to make sure I get the ball in Manning's hands for the win.  This decision was all about the greatness of these two QBs, Bill would rather have his great QB decide the game than the Colts great QB.  With Brady against a real banged up Colts secondary and only needing two yards, they had a high percentage chance of locking up the game right there.  It was all about which offense (and quarterback) Bill wanted to decide the game.  Like him or not, BB made a brilliant and gutzy decision.  At first thought last night I also thought he was crazy, but I now realize he was crazy like a fox- even though it didn't work out this time.
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2008
Posts: 10328
Posted: #27

I've seen that kind of thing before, let me ask you 1 question.

If this being the case, then why should any team punt the ball on 4th down at any point in the game ??

Just go for it everytime .  Although maybe mathmatically correct, it won't work in the real world.

 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2007
Posts: 16408
Posted: #28
theclaw- there has been actually been a study done...i will see if i can find it.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 5105
Posted: #29
All I have to said is  If they get the first down then BB is the God !!  If they didnt then BB is Cock sucker ego maniac!!!
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2007
Posts: 2843
Posted: #30
i agree with you wholeheartedly, pats broke the time honored paradigm and they're suffering for breaking ranks. the league is run by guys to dumb and entrenched to look at change. too risky to change, alot like the guys lemmings keep putting in congress.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2002
Posts: 7662
Posted: #31
I absolutely love this post also.  One of the best I've seen on here in a while.  I would be interested to know what the correction coefficients are for the strengths/weaknesses of the various offenses/defenses.  This is essentially Billy Beane's Moneyball for football.  Using real data to break decades worth of tradition.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 482
Posted: #32

Quote Originally Posted by gfinger:

Yeah, how about this stat. When the Pats are up 6 with 2:00 left and they punt the ball and the other team has to go ~70 yards, they win the game 95% of the time. That is a higher percentage than his 78% on 4th down. Think about it.

Do you have some sort of database that told you this....or did you just make up this "stat" out of thin air?!?!

I've looked through the past data and don't seem to find anything anywhere that remotely supports 95%.   I've designed a model to look at this.  My model came up with 27% probability they lose if they punt.  Advancednflstats.com looked at it as well.  Their model says 30%.  You can fiddle around with the variables but you are going to end up somewhere in the 20-40% range for Indy's chances if you punt.

I'm not one of the people that is saying "the Patriots were doomed....It was a sure thing that Manning would come back and beat them, etc., etc."  However, there was a significant probability Indy would win if they kicked. 

Go back and look at the stats in detail and you'll see that I'm right.

 

 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2002
Posts: 67006
Posted: #33
Quote Originally Posted by tallguyindc:

I'm watching all of the commentary and the consensus among people on this is that Belichick let the emotions get the best of him and let emotion override discretion and wisdom.  They made a stupid call and thats why the Patriots lost.  I really don't get it.  Don't these people realize that this is why the Belichick is Belichick?  Calls like this one are why he has won all those Super Bowls.  Seriously, the man has the numbers on his side.

Consider a thought experiment.  What should the Colts have done if the call was up to them?  Belichick calls timeout and crosses the field and tells Caldwell.  Its up to you.  I can punt or I can go.

If you are Caldwell, do you give up a sure opportunity for Manning to get the ball back with plenty of time left in order to gamble that Brady couldn't get 2 yards.  Or do you take the safe route and ask them to punt?

My guess is that nearly every commentator that is saying that Belichick should have punted there would have told Caldwell that he should have accepted a punt if it was up to him.  The thing is that is wrong.  Its just blatantly and obviously wrong.  If going was a mistake for the Pats, it had to be a benefit to the Colts.  And vice versa.  But the truth is, if Caldwell had done that he would have been making a huge and bad gamble.  

Here is the math:  I'm going to give the algebra first and then fill in the variables.  There might be some debate over the numbers, but this is the basic formula.  You really can't argue with the formula.  You can only change the numbers in it.

Psucc = Probability of converting 4th down

Pi65 = Probability of stopping from Indy from scoring giving Indy the ball 65 yards out.

Pi28 = Probability of stopping Indy from scoring giving them the ball 28 yards out.

If  Psucc + (1- Psucc) * Pi28 > Pi65, you should go for it.  If

Psucc + (1- Psucc) * Pi28 < Pi65 you should punt.  Its that simple.  Now, all you have to do is plug the appropriate numbers in. 

I have a fairly complicated model that I use.  It basically takes NFL averages and adjusts for the strength of the offense and the defense in question.  I have:

Psucc = 60%

Pi65 = 58%

Pi28 = 73%

Win Probability of going for it =

0.6 + (0.4 * 0.58) = 0.83

83% > 73%

The calculated and logical decision was to go for it.  The emotional decision was to give into the emotion of fear and punt.

I'm curious for all of the people that question the call, what numbers they were plugging into their calculations.

It seems to me like they are saying two sort of contradictory things.  They seem to think Pi28 is really low because Manning is the best QB on earth.  They also seem to think that Pi65 is really high because there is no way that Manning could score from 65 yards out with 2 minutes and a timeout left.  I'm not sure how those two facts seem to work together.  I wish that some of these people that are saying that punting is the "smart" decision would explain some of the logic behind their mathematical model because I really don't get it.  I've tried changing the variables around....making Manning stronger or weaker.  The thing is that when I change Pi28, I need to change Pi65 as well.  Any numbers that have any semblance to reality for probabilities say you should go for it.  I know this is strange and that it doesn't hold to conventional wisdom.  But remember conventional wisdom is long on convention and short on wisdom.

Thats the other weird thing about the "have confidence in your defense" argument.  Belichick did have confidence in his defense.  The 4th down move wasn't a bet that the offense would win the game on that play.  It was a bet that either the offense would win on that play or the defense would hold them for the last 28 yards.

 

Google David Romer 4th down.  Romer is a professor at Stanford.  He did a whole long mathematical analysis on this topic.   Nearly every other math person that has looked at this topic in any detail agrees with Romer.  The Patriots are the Patriots because they take calculated risks.  I'd expect gamblers or "sports investors" as a lot of the people on this blog seem to describe themselves as the kind of people that would instinctually understand this.

 



You think there is only a 15% better chance to score from 28 yards than from 65 yards inside 2 minutes with only 1 TO?  That's just bananas crazy.  The short field took the clock out of the equation.  58% chance to score from 65 (or maybe more) yards with only 1 clock stoppage.  Plain crazy.  More like 30-35%.

Love the formula, hate your inputs.  All of them way way off.
Psucc = 45%
Pi28 = 74%
Pi65 = 35%

And then you need to further adjust for the fact that even with a 1st down, they couldn't have quite run the clock fully out without another first down, would have been around 25 seconds.

It's fairly close, but punt was the correct call in this situation.  You also have to realize on the 4th and (long) 2, this is not your typical 4th down where the defense is worried about defending for a long play.  It was basically first down or no first down, so they knew that NE was going short for it and played it that way.  Moreover, you have to slightly factor in that NE had no remaining challenges, which as it turned out, was rather important.

Hey, I'm a math geek and this seems like math geeks want this so bad to be some teachable moments that they are going to make it as such, with wild ridiculous assumptions.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2009
Posts: 96
Posted: #34
Your retarded if you think he made the right call! How can you possibly let the opposing team have the ball on your own 25 with under 2 mins left? Ya ya its ballgame if they get it, but its also game over for them if they dont get it right there. Simple as this though, PUNT!!!!!!

Make them work for the touchdown just don't give them the touchdown!!!
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 28196
Posted: #35

Quote Originally Posted by depeche2:



You think there is only a 15% better chance to score from 28 yards than from 65 yards inside 2 minutes with only 1 TO?  That's just bananas crazy.  The short field took the clock out of the equation.  58% chance to score from 65 (or maybe more) yards with only 1 clock stoppage.  Plain crazy.  More like 30-35%.

Love the formula, hate your inputs.  All of them way way off.
Psucc = 45%
Pi28 = 74%
Pi65 = 35%

And then you need to further adjust for the fact that even with a 1st down, they couldn't have quite run the clock fully out without another first down, would have been around 25 seconds.

It's fairly close, but punt was the correct call in this situation.  You also have to realize on the 4th and (long) 2, this is not your typical 4th down where the defense is worried about defending for a long play.  It was basically first down or no first down, so they knew that NE was going short for it and played it that way.  Moreover, you have to slightly factor in that NE had no remaining challenges, which as it turned out, was rather important.

Hey, I'm a math geek and this seems like math geeks want this so bad to be some teachable moments that they are going to make it as such, with wild ridiculous assumptions.

the other thing all these numbers ignore is that when you go for it there and don't make it, there is a tremendous momentum shift, and football is so much about momentum. 

if it was all about the numbers, you wouldn't really need a coach.  but by going for it, you basically tell your defense, fuck you, you guys suck (i'm pretty sure the defensive players didn't get a look at the percentages and understand the decision), now go back out there and keep manning from scoring with no time pressure and all the momentum shifted to him. 

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2006
Posts: 284
Posted: #36

leaving aside all different wagers on this game, in the pure football sense, this was an awful call whatever way you look at it and the bottom line is, it lost them the game.  He is the only coach that would ever have made that call, he plays risky football and it has tended to workout for him in the past, but it finally caught up with him and in a big way this time.  lots of angle to look at this but in my opinion, none can justify this call

 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2002
Posts: 67006
Posted: #37
I also think he mistakenly thought it was 4th and 1 instead of 4th and 2.
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2003
Posts: 726
Posted: #38

Quote Originally Posted by MTFN50:

The funny part is what if he made  the 1st down  Is it a bad call with lucky results or a great call. I say bad call either way.Kinda like going all in  with bottom pair and hitting ur trips on the river 

Calls like this have made Belichick......Belichick. This is why he is the master. Yeah..Most coaches in the NFL would have punted..and this is why most coaches in the NFL have not been as succesfull as BB. BB has gone for it against the Colts 12 times since 2000....made it 8 times.....has gone of it 4 times in the playoffs against the colts...and made it 4 times. I'm no math wiz and won't even try to analyze the above equation...all I know is that the Patriots Defense was not getting to Manning....They were giving him all day to throw, and when you give Manning or Brady all day to throw the ball, they will kill you. and BB knew this. Give the ball to Manning at the 29 yard line or give it to him at his own 20 yard line....if your not going to get in his face..He will score either...after all of that BLAhBlahBlah...I would have punted...but thats why I don't have three Super Bowl Rings on my fingers.

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 482
Posted: #39
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw:

I've seen that kind of thing before, let me ask you 1 question.

If this being the case, then why should any team punt the ball on 4th down at any point in the game ??

Just go for it everytime .  Although maybe mathmatically correct, it won't work in the real world.

 

Short answer:

Because reactionary idiots like the people on this board and the "analysts" on TV would scream for the coach's head whenever it didn't work.  Job security is more important to coaches than actually winning games.

There is a high school coach in Arkansas that actually tried the never punt strategy in the real world.  Real world result:  They won the state championship despite being considerably smaller and slower than a lot of their rivals.

https://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/jon_wertheim/09/17/no.punt/index.html

In the NFL, never punting is not the correct mathematical solution.  But teams should punt far far less often than they do.  The "always punt on fourth down" strategy is a relic of the old three yards and a cloud of dust style of play 50 years ago.  It made sense back then when the final score was often 7-6.  It doesn't make sense now.  But some people are slow to evolve.

 

 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2007
Posts: 16408
Posted: #40
posted this elsewhere, but better suited for here...

scientific study:  
https://elsa.berkeley.edu/%7Edromer/papers/PAPER_NFL_JULY05_FORWEB_CORRECTED.pdf

summary of the study for people like me:
https://www.advancednflstats.com/2008/11/romer-4th-down-study-underestimates.html
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2009
Posts: 12
Posted: #41
It all comes down to Payton Manning. If it was some other QB, Pats would have punted. Over 2min left for Manning is way too much. So yes I would say go for it was the right move.
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2007
Posts: 27746
Posted: #42

how abou tthis little equation since you like math so much.

Peyton Manning+29 yards/2:00=Game Winning TD pass.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2009
Posts: 3083
Posted: #43
I have no problem whats so ever with the play call. None. Nada. What I have a problem with is that Bill didn't instruct his team to let the colts waltz into the endzone "ONCE THE FIRST DOWN WAS MADE" with the run up the middle with 1:20 left in the game. Coach Del Rio had his players aware of the situation when Jones-Drew kneeled at the one to run the clock down as much as possible before attempting the FG. Brady would of had a minute + to get into FG range. That bugged me. When Addai got tackled at the 1, i knew the Pats had no chance at all. He did not give his team the best chance to win, and that blows. And by the way, I had New England +3 so it didn't cost me. I also had New England +9 over 42 (6 point tease) and New England +9 and Ravens -5 (still pending obviously)
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 5673
Posted: #44
Quote Originally Posted by tallguyindc:

I'm watching all of the commentary and the consensus among people on this is that Belichick let the emotions get the best of him and let emotion override discretion and wisdom.  They made a stupid call and thats why the Patriots lost.  I really don't get it.  Don't these people realize that this is why the Belichick is Belichick?  Calls like this one are why he has won all those Super Bowls.  Seriously, the man has the numbers on his side.

Consider a thought experiment.  What should the Colts have done if the call was up to them?  Belichick calls timeout and crosses the field and tells Caldwell.  Its up to you.  I can punt or I can go.

If you are Caldwell, do you give up a sure opportunity for Manning to get the ball back with plenty of time left in order to gamble that Brady couldn't get 2 yards.  Or do you take the safe route and ask them to punt?

My guess is that nearly every commentator that is saying that Belichick should have punted there would have told Caldwell that he should have accepted a punt if it was up to him.  The thing is that is wrong.  Its just blatantly and obviously wrong.  If going was a mistake for the Pats, it had to be a benefit to the Colts.  And vice versa.  But the truth is, if Caldwell had done that he would have been making a huge and bad gamble.  

Here is the math:  I'm going to give the algebra first and then fill in the variables.  There might be some debate over the numbers, but this is the basic formula.  You really can't argue with the formula.  You can only change the numbers in it.

Psucc = Probability of converting 4th down

Pi65 = Probability of stopping from Indy from scoring giving Indy the ball 65 yards out.

Pi28 = Probability of stopping Indy from scoring giving them the ball 28 yards out.

If  Psucc + (1- Psucc) * Pi28 > Pi65, you should go for it.  If

Psucc + (1- Psucc) * Pi28 < Pi65 you should punt.  Its that simple.  Now, all you have to do is plug the appropriate numbers in. 

I have a fairly complicated model that I use.  It basically takes NFL averages and adjusts for the strength of the offense and the defense in question.  I have:

Psucc = 60%

Pi65 = 58%

Pi28 = 73%

Win Probability of going for it =

0.6 + (0.4 * 0.58) = 0.83

83% > 73%

The calculated and logical decision was to go for it.  The emotional decision was to give into the emotion of fear and punt.

I'm curious for all of the people that question the call, what numbers they were plugging into their calculations.

It seems to me like they are saying two sort of contradictory things.  They seem to think Pi28 is really low because Manning is the best QB on earth.  They also seem to think that Pi65 is really high because there is no way that Manning could score from 65 yards out with 2 minutes and a timeout left.  I'm not sure how those two facts seem to work together.  I wish that some of these people that are saying that punting is the "smart" decision would explain some of the logic behind their mathematical model because I really don't get it.  I've tried changing the variables around....making Manning stronger or weaker.  The thing is that when I change Pi28, I need to change Pi65 as well.  Any numbers that have any semblance to reality for probabilities say you should go for it.  I know this is strange and that it doesn't hold to conventional wisdom.  But remember conventional wisdom is long on convention and short on wisdom.

Thats the other weird thing about the "have confidence in your defense" argument.  Belichick did have confidence in his defense.  The 4th down move wasn't a bet that the offense would win the game on that play.  It was a bet that either the offense would win on that play or the defense would hold them for the last 28 yards.

 

Google David Romer 4th down.  Romer is a professor at Stanford.  He did a whole long mathematical analysis on this topic.   Nearly every other math person that has looked at this topic in any detail agrees with Romer.  The Patriots are the Patriots because they take calculated risks.  I'd expect gamblers or "sports investors" as a lot of the people on this blog seem to describe themselves as the kind of people that would instinctually understand this.

 

 

How can you have the probability of stopping indy from 65 yards out lower than the probability of stopping them from 28 yards out?

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2009
Posts: 2909
Posted: #45
I am sure the decision was based off of much analysis and may have been the right one.  It seems to come down to:

probablity of getting those yards vs probability that manning goes 60-70 yards with 2:20 (approx) and a timeout against an obviously gassed defense. 

My problem with the end of that game is this:
1. The timeouts leaving them with no ability to challenge (espcially the timout on first down?)
2. Once you DON'T make it, and you know your defense is gassed, why not send the house and try to get a fumble or a sack on the first play?  Maybe even the next?  The worst that could happen is that BRADY has the ball down 1 with about 2 minutes to play and has to go 40 yards to get into field goal range.  Even after the first completion I would just let them score, keep a minute on the clock and abuse those Indy corners.

My problem is not so much the decision as the before and after.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2005
Posts: 5202
Posted: #46

wouldn't it be 0.6 + (0.4 x 0.27) = 71%

 

I don't get why you are multiplying the 40% by 0.58.  The chances you say they stop them are 27% if they don't get the first down.  What am I missing??

 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 10216
Posted: #47

He made the RIGHT call------------------I agree!

WRONG SIDE OF THE FIELD THOUGH!

Not at your own 29 yrd line! AT the COLTS 45 0r 40 yes. or even at the 50 would make SOME SENSE! not there though!

 

 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2007
Posts: 15731
Posted: #48

The general philosophy/mathematics of going for it on 4th is not that relevant in this case & I guarantee you even Belichick has never gone for it in that exact same scenario in a gm like that. I like to see teams go for it more on 4th down & think they should more than most do, but that was just plain wrong. There's a reason why they call it "conventional wisdom" & it bit 'em on the butt. And had they made it, it would have been no less a terrible decision. Just way to risky & too many things that can happen to help keep the other tm from scoring regardless of the QB & offense.

If they go the distance, you tip you're hat & may regret some other things you did earlier, but as a coach you never wanna have to regret a decision like that. You play the game out & let your D go to work no matter how scary - not basically take the game into your own hands with a ridiculously risky 1 play decision like that. Still a little stunned he did it -

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 482
Posted: #49
Quote Originally Posted by MTFN50:

all I hear on espn is the % play is punting the ball.This complicated math equations dont really prove anything.Keep the math to poker ,You cant possibly believe that its better to go give Peyton of all people a chance to get the ball at the28 instead of haveing to drive 70yards.. Believe me the math isnt over  our heads  .u can make any thing look logical with numbers and equations pertaining to sports.

All I hear on ESPN is the % play is punting the ball....

I hear that too.  This is the thing that I hate the most about sports broadcasters and "analysts".  They say the numbers say to do something but they don't tell you what the fucking numbers are that they are using.  The % play isn't to punt the ball.  There are a lot of math people that have looked at this and they've all come to the same conclusion...with quite a lot of detail as to how they got there.  If you are going to say "the numbers said to do it' over and over again, you can at least give some detail as to what "the numbers" are.

Keep that in mind the next time you watch sports. 

 

 

 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 165
Posted: #50
Quote Originally Posted by peepeedik09:

TALLGUY... if you want to play the numbers game... give us these numbers...

What's the percentage of teams leading by 4-6 points, that punt the ball with 2 minutes or less in the 4th quarter...  AND LOSE???????

 


Peyton Manning was dominating in the second half.  Even the best defenses around can't stop him.  I applaud the patriots for trying to take control of their own destiny.

I know I wouldn't want to give Peyton manning the ball with 2 minutes left.  I think they made the right call.

Had they converted everyone would be singing his praises right now.

I think the NFL is a bunch of sissies in that most 4th down situations in the "gray" area of the field usually result in a punt or field goal try.



All Forums | NFL Betting
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2024 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.