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

Belichick and right call don't belong in the same sentence unless if it is... the pats owner made the right call in firing Belichick. I hate the pats so that call made my day. If you think that belichick made the right call then you obviously don't understand football you should just leave this forum right now, go on leave what are you waiting for?

This thread is a grat example of how people can make a living gambling on sports and how books are still able to be profitable.

Its one thing to not be able to figure the proabilities out on your own.  Its a whole different story to have it all out right infront your face and still say dum stuff like thanking3412.

Wow this is interesting so I will join the discussion. First I understand the Math of your agrument and saying it was the right call. Probability aside he made many errors down the stretch that cost him that game including going for it on 4th, and thats the fact by the mathmatics of the final score 34 to 35 ! He made the wrong decision because they lost, this is not debatable. Any math problem comes to a conclusion and your either correct or incorrect and cheater Bellick failed the test last night. Whether or not you or he would do it again because the odds were in your advantage is a subject that can be discussed. What I would do is not blow those time outs and yes I would have gone for it on 4th. However my next question to you is why after they failed did they not just let Addai go into the endzone and get the ball back with over a minute left. Barring a Marice Jones Drew situation which would be risky and probable not planned yet by Indy; Bellichek would have the ball back in his hands down only one with his saved timeouts and over a minute left. Surely the Brady and Company could go down the feild and get 3 points to win the game. Even early in the game when Indy was down this game had a which team had the the ball last would win feeling to it. My last point is Brady and Faulk did not lose this game Bellichek lost this game with horrible time managment and coaching decisions ! I have always felt he is way overated and beleive astericks should go by his super bowls that he had to cheat to win. Remember they were not blow outs, they hade to kick feild goals to barley win those championships and a edge/cheating in a close game  is how they won. Lets count their championships after the cheating was exposed and  then swept under the carpet to protect the NFL intergrity. I Count Zero !

Good Luck to all !

LOL....

Sometimes it really makes me question the level of math education in this country. 

For those that are interested, advancednflstats.com just posted a really good article on the 2 minute drill.  They have a graph of all of the times that a team needs a touchdown to win from every grouping of yard lines.  You can use this to help come up with the probabilities behind the equation.

I think part of the disconnect is that for some reason, the people that want to punt are saying that the probability of Manning scoring from 28 yards out is some absurdly high number like 80% and the probability of him scoring from 65 yards out is some absurdly low number like 20%.  If that was true, punting would be a no brainer. 

If there is any one rule you need to live by in sports coaching (or sports gambling for that matter), its to make sure that your probability estimates are always somewhat grounded in reality.

"However my next question to you is why after they failed did they not just let Addai go into the endzone and get the ball back with over a minute left. "

Sorry to keep plugging this site, but advancednflstats.com has a fairly good article on this subject as well.

They have the probabilities for this as a wash.  I think I lean towards the play defense and stop them. 

The important thing to remember is that Belichick was in no way ceding the TD when he made the call. I guess that is what is so disturbing about the punt argument.  They imply the bet was get 2 yards or let your defense stop them from 65.

The real bet was either my offense gets 2 or my defense stops them from getting 28.  In essense, Belichick offered the Colts a parlay instead of a straight bet.  They need to beat him twice in order to win.  Just because part A doesn't work doesn't necessarily mean part B won't work either. 

He made the wrong decision because they lost, this is not debatable. Any math problem comes to a conclusion and your either correct or incorrect and cheater Bellick failed the test last night.

I don't know about this.  I offer you the opportunity to pull a card out of a fair deck.  If that card is a club, I pay you  $1.  If that card is not a club, you pay me $1.  You accept and pull a club.  Did I make a bad decision to offer the bet?  Did you make a good one to decide it?

To say every reckless gamble that works is a good gamble and every smart gamble that doesn't work is a bad one is a tad reactionary. 

The point of this whole thread is that punting is the reckless gamble.  The (relatively) safe move is to go for it.

Wow thanking,  Is that all you have to defend your position.  Correcting my typos.  I also spell great "grat".

Yes, I think it was a good idea. I also know im correct.  Not think, KNOW. 

If you think punting was the correct coaching decision then you......

1- have decided to post in this thread without reading the OP (original post, you probable dont know what that means)

2- are stupid

Although i lean stongly toward the #2 I like to give people a chance to prove me wrong. but if i am wrong dont just tell me, give me something similar to tallguyindc and prove yourself. If you look at what actually happened to prove your point you are DUMB.   there is to much luck in any one situation for it to mean anything.  Coaches should be judged or praised based on the means of there decisions, not the end result. 

To support my claim i only have to revert you to the original post.

So next time you sign onto covers support your claim - If you think that belichick made the right call then you obviously don't understand football you should just leave this forum right now, go on leave what are you waiting for?  with good factual information or lose all of your credibility and leave with your tail between your legs. 

I'm waiting..................

And BTW, you are the example of why the books are still profitable          

I disagree Kelly_Slater.  While that post was intended to not let idiocracy go unpunished I think this topic should be discussed much more. And the reason why coaches choose to ignore the proabalistic truths. 

His decision has showns us what analysis, ex-coaches, and posters have NO IDEA what they are talking about, but talk anyway. But it may also turn up the heat on this topic.  At least i'm hoping it will

If you can get them at even odds, yes you should always bet favorites blindly!!!  Because on paper they are the correct pick!!!

That much seems obvious to me.

Of course that isn't the offer that Vegas is giving you.  They are saying bet $1 to win 50c on the favorite or bet $1 to win $2 on the dog.  Under those circumstances, you need to adjust your model and account for pot odds. 

If you think there is a 45% chance team A will win and a 55% chance team B will win and the odds are +190 on A or -200 on B, bet on A, even though you expect they will lose.  Its basic math.

However, I'm not sure how this relates to the Belichick decision.  If Roger Goodell had called Belichick during the timeout and said:

Hey Bill we're only going to charge you with half a loss if you punt and lose but we're going to charge you with two losses if you go for it and lose, he'd punt.  That would be the correct decision.

Goodell didn't do that.  So pot odds doesn't play into the equation.  A loss is a loss.  Try your best to avoid one. 

Believe it or not, that is what Belichick did.  If you don't understand how, reread the original post and all of the supporting posts. 

Touche...

I'll freely admit that I've spent way too much time on this topic in the last couple days.

Perfect storm of factors:

a) I love statistical analysis and math. I do it for a living and finding out the exact probability of events is weirdly exciting for me.

b) I've noticed for a long time that coaches don't go for it on fourth often enough.  Frankly, this is the biggest mathematical error in all of sports.  Punt less and go more and you'll pick up one win a year on average.  No other easy change would have anywhere near the expected return. 

I'm fairly certain that all coaches realize this.  None of them had the guts to put their reputation on the line....until now.  It was inevitable, somebody would eventually try this.  The +EV was unavoidable...

To put it mildly, I knew this day was coming and I was waiting for it....

c) My wife is out of town

d) Its been slow at the office.

So, yes, I've spent more time on this than is probably healthy....but so what....some guys like to sit for hours with a fishing pole in their hand....some like to sit on a barstool....I like to analyze math and football. My hobby might make me a "loser".  Kill me.  In fairness, nobody on this site has the right to cast stones on this. 

An investment banker that doesn't understand basic probability analysis...and responds to anything he doesn't understand with little more than a tirade of profanity.

I'm a Wall Street guy too.  I wish I could say that you were lying, but the scary thing is that you are probably telling the truth.

Let me guess you work in mortgage backed securities...

You were almost certainly in tech stocks at the end of last decade.

People like you are why the majority of this country hates our industry.....

Maybe you do understand probability analysis but you didn't appear to use it in this case.

The point of the whole thread is that if you look at the probs of all of the individual events and combine them, Belichick made the right call.  

This is something that hasn't been a secret to football fans who are math people for a long time.  Its well understood by anybody that has looked at the probabilities in detail that coaches routinely punt when they should go for it. 

If you really are an investment banker and you really are interested in football, you should read one of the many analyses on this subject.  advancednflstats.com is a good place to start.  The Romer paper is also good if you have a lot of spare time.

The reason why coaches punt so often isn't that punting is mathematically correct.  The reasons is a bunch of yahoos like the ones on this site don't know how to do the math...so their choice becomes

a) punt and there is a 30% chance the defense will get blamed for a loss

b) go for it and there is a 25% chance I'll get blamed for a loss

If you really do understand football, you understand why coaches always pick b).  That doesn't make b) the right choice.   And in a way it undermines everything they claim to stand for. 

A coach will ask a player to take one for the team and play with a concussion even though that might give him dementia as an old man, but he can't do call what he knows is the mathematically correct play because he's afraid some know-nothing fans will demand he get fired over it.

If you really are an investment banker, I'm sure you can understand what I'm trying to say.

Oops...I meant coaches always pick a)

Your first post..........

If you think that belichick made the right call then you obviously don't understand football you should just leave this forum right now, go on leave what are you waiting for?

After you found out you were wrong.....

all I have said is basically belichick made a bad call ( personal opinion ) and Achigurh is an idiot ( fact ) thats all I've said in a nutshell

I called you dumb because your first post was not an opinion.  If it was i would not have called you dumb........

and I gave you the chance to explain yourself.....

Theres 2 things people do around here when they know they are wrong....  Swear, and talk about how much better there real life is than yours. 

I knew your post before you wrote it

Quote Originally Posted by thaking3412:



First person to actually make sense on this site, and I'm not just saying that so that I sound like an investment banker, I really am one, I have nothing to gain from lying about it. That's a good one about me having spare time though, you sound like you know alot about investment bankers so I found it funny you would say that, every one that I know works like 20 hour days (well pretty much anybody in financing) , but really good advice I will definetly check into that website cause I love betting on football.
My priorities are work, fiance, football ( hard to determine what order to put them in )

LOL....I'm buy side.  We get a little bit of extra free time.  Not so much that I should be obsessing over topics like this but....

I started out sell side.  Don't miss it at all.