Monday, November 23, 2009

For the Luckbox

Read the link, then read my revision of the math. Look, an argument I support with numbers. Did I wrinkle your brain?
Royal Poker Blog: Belichick Was Correct

The linked post shows the calculation in favor of going for it as:
(0.60 * 1) + (0.40 * (1-0.53)) = 0.79 WP

I actually calc this as:
(0.75 * 1) + (0.40 * (1-0.65)) = 0.89 WP

based on the Pats 4th down conversion % against the Colts of 75% as told by ESPN and my own assessment of how likely the Colts are to score from the 28.

Additionally I'd say 30% chance that Colts make a TD after the punt is low. I'm not sure how low, but I am sure the Colts are at least 1 Standard deviation from the mean, so in the case of punting the Pats WP is probably more like .60 or .55.

That being said, if it works he's a genius, if it fails he's a goat.

GOAT Belicheat!


Luckbox said...

You guys are hilarious. The third straight poker blogger to post this one guy's numbers. As though that settles it. Hilarious.

Still maintaining Belichick lost on a 3-outer? Sounds like bad math to me...

Bill said...

The Pats offense getting 2 yards or the Pats defense holding Manning in check? I'll go for the 2 yards every time.

Also, I didn't use "one guy's numbers" I used my own numbers and thought that his formula was valid.

alan said...

Your numbers actually should total 83.75%... your 0.40 should be 0.25.

Jose said...

Dear Webmaster,

My name is Jose, and I'm in charge of marketing Euro Partners and am looking for some serious partners for my brand.

I'm interested in having our Poker brand promoted on your website and would like to discuss this in more detail ASAP.

Best Regards,

Jose Danon
Affiliate Manager

* Mobile +972 54 8099 244 : Spain +34 900 957 056 ext. 2627
* US 1 866 725 8558 ext. 2627
* UK +44 0 800 066 4322 ext. 2627

IM :
Email :