Who Will Win the 2013 World Series

Here is our analysis for this year's World Series, published in the New York Times.  

 In particular, our work relates key statistical factors to concepts of sports psychology like leadership, consistency and minimizing errors. Based on this research, we focused on factors that might help predict the winner of the World Series between the Boston Red Sox and the St. Louis Cardinals, which begins Wednesday night.


Carlton J. Chin, a portfolio strategist and fund manager, and Jay P. Granat, psychotherapist, are authors of “Who Will Win the Big Game? A Psychological & Mathematical Method.” They have previously written about the N.C.A.A. men’s basketball tournament, the N.B.A. finals and theN.H.L. Stanley Cup finals.



The sports psychology factors point to the St. Louis Cardinals, even though the Boston Red Sox are a slight favorite.  The Cardinals will count in our official "quant fact" predictions.  

Read more here: 
http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/23/keeping-score-statistics-to-watch-at-the-world-series/

U.S. Open - Men's Quarterfinals

As a follow-up to our Monte Carlo analysis to the women's quarterfinals published in the New York Times yesterday, here is an analysis of the men's quarterfinals.  The research was performed by Carlton Chin, a portfolio strategist and fund manager, and Rose Wang, head of finance at a health care non-profit.  


Monte Carlo Model: Probability of Winning the U.S. Open

1. Novak Djokovic (1) 45.8%
2. Rafael Nadal (2) 25.8%
3. Andy Murray (3) 12.7%
4. David Ferrer (4) 6.6%
5. Richard Gasquet (8) 5.0%
6. Tommy Robredo (19) 1.9%
7. Stanislas Wawrinka (9) 1.8%
8. Mikhail Youzhny (21) 0.5%

The Monte Carlo model gives Novak Djokovic an edge over Rafael Nadal and Andy Murray. In addition, Djokovic has the easiest quarterfinal matchup of the three top seeds, at least statistically.


Read more here:
http://straightsets.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/04/keeping-score-monte-carlo-analysis-of-mens-draw/?_r=0

2013 Stanley Cup Finals (NY Times)

Here's an excerpt from our analysis in the New York Times.  

 Based on this research, we focused on several championship characteristics that might predict the winner of this year’s Stanley Cup finals.  We also applied a Monte Carlo simulation to compute series probabilities for the finals.

In particular, we focused on factors related to sports psychology like big game experience, leadership and consistency. These concepts have proven to be common themes across all sports we have studied.

Big Game Experience: Across all sports, we have found a meaningful relationship between big game experience and winning championships.  In our work, big game experience is measured by appearances in finals over the past three years. In the N.H.L., the team with an edge in this area has gone 11-2 (84.6 percent) in Stanley Cup finals series over the past 33 years.  Both the Blackhawks and Bruins have made finals appearances over the past three years. Edge: Even

Read the complete article here:
http://slapshot.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/12/keeping-score-which-statistics-show-path-to-the-cup/ 

Who Will Win the 2013 NBA Finals?

Here's an excerpt from our analysis that was published in the New York Times.  Please click on the link below for the entire article.

Based on this research, we focused on several championship characteristics that might help predict the winner of the N.B.A. finals. We also applied a Monte Carlo simulation similar to methods used in our previous articles to compute series probabilities for the NBA finals between the Miami Heat and the San Antonio Spurs.

Big Game Experience: Over the past 23 years, the team with more finals appearances over the previous three years has 12 of 15 (80.0%) in N.B.A. finals. The Miami Heat are in their third consecutive finals, winning the title last year. Edge: Miami.

...We ran a Monte Carlo simulation based on our factors and the home-away schedule for this year’s N.B.A. finals. The simulation says that Miami has a 71.2 percent chance of winning, with the following probabilities:

Please click below for the probabilities and the whole article.  

http://offthedribble.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/06/keeping-score-key-statistics-favor-heat/

NCAA Men's Basketball Championship Game (2013)

Below is an excerpt from our article in the NY Times, based on quant research of factors related to sports psychology, 

...we focused on factors that might help predict the winner of the N.C.A.A. tournament championship game between Louisville and Michigan. Last year’s article correctly selected Kentucky to win the national title.

With an eye toward key concepts of sport psychology, we looked at factors like big-game experience, leadership behind the bench, leadership on the court, error control and consistency. 

Consistency:  The team with the higher 3-point shooting percentage has won 11 of the last 14 title games.  Free-throw shooting percentage is also a measure of consistency, and teams with the higher free0throw percentage have gone 10-4 over the past 14 championship games.

In the table below, we list the performance of the Final Four teams in consistency categories like 3-point shooting and free-throw percentage.  We also included turnovers and a defensive measure because these are also championship traits.

	Louisville	Michigan
3-pt shooting%	32.9%	38.3%
Free-throw %	70.7%	70.0%
Turnovers per game	12.5	9.4
FG shooting defense	39.2%	42.3%

Who Will Win the Big Game?  Louisville has more championship factors in its favor, by a narrow 4-3 margin.  Based on our championship factors and season statistics, we developed a Monte Carlo simulator for college basketball, similar to the methodology we used for our football analyses.  The most frequently-occurring score was  Louisville 70, Michigan 69.

Read more here:

http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/08/keeping-score-which-team-has-the-stats-of-a-champion/#more-46404

Super Bowl Sims and Championship Characteristics - 2013

Here is an excerpt from our analysis and numerical simulations of this year's Super Bowl, between San Francisco and Baltimore, which is published in the New York Times.  Our quant facts have been correct more than 60% of the time.

Consistency: Ball control remains one of the more important offensive indicators studied in both professional and college football. The team with a better running game, as measured by average yards per rush, has won 57.8 percent of the Super Bowls. The 49ers averaged 5.1 yards per rush this season, compared to 4.3 for the Ravens. Edge: San Francisco.

Monte Carlo Simulations: Probabilistic models like Monte Carlo techniques can be used to solve complicated problems. Similar to our analysis for the B.C.S. national title game between Alabama and Notre Dame, we used regular-season statistics in combination with our championship factors to simulate thousands of football games between San Francisco and Baltimore.

Read more here:
http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/02/keeping-score-what-stats-and-simulations-say-about-the-super-bowl/ 

In addition, our popular analysis of Super Bowl Square Odds -- by Quarter -- is published here:
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-917541

College Football's 2013 BCS: Alabama vs. Notre Dame

Here is an excerpt from our "Who Will Win?" analysis on the BCS game between Alabama and Notre Dame, that was published by the NY Times.  


We typically apply a quantitative analysis of sports psychology concepts to predict the winner of various sports championships.  In this article, we took this a step further and used quant investment techniques (including probabilistic Monte Carlo methods) to develop a football simulator to take a look at the big game between Alabama and Notre Dame in this year's college football national championship BCS game.

Here is an excerpt from the article in the NY Times.

... our work relates key statistics to sports psychology concepts like leadership, consistency and minimizing errors. We have also developed a football simulator based on a probabilistic Monte Carlo model to use in conjunction with our championship factors. 

Simulation: We developed a football simulator that plays out thousands of games relatively quickly. The simulator is a probabilistic Monte Carlo model that uses statistics and results from the regular season.

... football games can be modeled based on certain random variables, statistics and our championship factors. The final score that came up most frequently on our simulator was Alabama 27, Notre Dame 14. As expected, we got a cloud of widely varying results, but this is the center of the model's probability distribution.

Edge: Alabama

Read more here:

http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/07/keeping-score-characteristics-of-a-champion/#more-44985

Carlton J. Chin, a portfolio strategist and fund manager, and Jay P. Granat, psychotherapist, are authors of "Who Will Win the Big Game? A Psychological & Mathematical Method." They have previously written about the N.C.A.A. men's basketball tournament, the N.B.A. finals and the Super Bowl.

Olympics: Revisiting a Popular Article

With the 2012 Olympics set to start in London (and today being July 4th), we thought we would revisit one of our more popular articles -- on the 1980 Miracle on Ice.  In that article, we looked at concepts of sports psychology and did an interesting and fun analysis (including Monte Carlo simulations) to study the odds of the U.S. ice hockey team winning the gold medal.

Herb Brooks was a true master of sports psychology, graduating from college with a degree in psychology.  Brooks knew he had a chance to make some noise at the Olympics - especially with the US hosting the Winter Olympics.  Brooks worked at gathering players who could lift their games to special levels -- and could also play as part of a team where the sum of the parts were greater than the individual pieces.  

On goaltender Jim Craig and other players, Brooks said, "I don't want the best players, I want the right players."  Brooks knew what he was doing when he put his 1980 team together, piece by piece.  He also knew how to "push the players' buttons" and was tough on many members of that Miracle on Ice -- but eventually created one of the most beloved U.S. sports stories of the twentieth century.

Based on key hockey statistics and expectations, we performed a Monte Carlo simulation to study the odds of the United States hockey team winning the gold medal. Monte Carlo methods use a random process to solve complicated problems...

In a similar manner, hockey games can be modeled based on certain random variables and key statistics, including shots on goal, save percentage and shot efficiency. If we model the United States team as a seventh seed, the probability of the United States winning the gold medal approaches odds as high as 1 in 1,000. 

But the United States turned out to be a stronger team than expected. Entering the medal round of the Olympics, the United States and Soviet teams were undefeated. The United States was 4-0-1, outscoring their opponents by 25-10, while the Russians were 5-0, outscoring their opponents by 51-11. The Soviet goaltenders, Vladislav Tretiak and Vladimir Myshkin, averaged a solid 88.2 save percentage, and the American goalie Jim Craig had a 91.7 save percentage.

If we base our simulations on the team’s performance in the tournament, the odds could have been as low as 17-to-1 for the United States win the gold medal.

The entire article was originally published in the NY Times in 2010, on the 30th anniversary of the Miracle on Ice.  Read more here:
http://vancouver2010.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/22/how-miraculous-was-the-miracle/?scp=1&sq=miraculous%20miracle&st=cse

2012 NBA Finals (NY Times)

Our "Who Will Win" analysis was published in the NY Times.  Here's an excerpt:

Big Game Experience: Over the past 22 years, the team with more finals appearances over the previous three years has won 11 of 14 finals series (78.6 percent) in which one team had more experience than the other. This factor favors the Miami Heat, who are in their second straight N.B.A. finals.

Error Control: In baseball, fielding percentage during the regular season is correlated to winning the World Series. Similarly, in professional basketball, the team with fewer turnovers during the regular season has won 72.7 percent of the N.B.A. finals (16-6) over the past 22 years. This factor favors Miami (1,002 turnovers) over Oklahoma City (1,079 turnovers).

Over all: The championship factors favor the Heat, 3-2. Indeed, several of the strongest factors, like big-game experience and error control, predict that James will come away with his first championship with Miami. 

Miami is our "book blog's" official "quant fact" prediction.

Read more here:
http://offthedribble.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/12/keeping-score-reading-statistics-like-tea-leaves/ 

Super Bowl Square Pools (Feb 2012)

The New York Times published our popular article on Square Pools in their Super Bowl Sunday spread two years ago. If you are in a square pool, the probabilities are interesting. To use the charts, find your numbers for each quarter on the grid -- and remember that Indy was favored two years ago (New England is favored this year).

To see how various combinations of numbers have fared, based on every quarter of the past 43 Super Bowls, we computed the probability for each square to win at the end of each quarter. To inform our calculations, we also took into account which team was favored to win.

Read more here:
http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/07/how-to-spot-a-winner-in-a-squares-pool/

We'll have our "quant fact" predictions for the Super Bowl out either Friday or Saturday.

Who Will Win the 2011 World Series? (Analysis for the NY Times)

Here is some analysis we did on the World Series for the NY Times:

... Last year these factors correctly predicted that the San Francisco Giants would beat the Texas Rangers. So how do the Cardinals and Rangers fare in analyzing their championship characteristics?

Pitching Leadership

In baseball, top starting pitchers are a good indicator of success during baseball’s playoff series. In particular, the finalist with the better top of the rotation, measured by total wins by its top two pitchers, has won 70 percent of the World Series over the past 22 years (not including 1994, when there was no postseason).  

Read more here:
http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/19/which-world-series-team-has-winning-traits/# 

NY Times: Which Team has the Right Stuff to Win the Cup?

Below is an excerpt on our analysis on the NHL Stanley Cup Finals:

Focusing on concepts of sports psychology, we looked at factors such as big-game experience, leadership on the ice and consistency. So important are these concepts to winning championships that they have proven to be common themes across all sports we have studied.

...

During the period of high-powered N.H.L. scoring from the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s, offensive leaders were more easily able to carry their teams to championships as Wayne Gretzky did with the Edmonton Oilers and Mario Lemieux did with the Pittsburgh Penguins.

...

Over all, championship factors like offensive leadership and defense favor the Vancouver Canucks to win the Stanley Cup. But Thomas may have something to say about that.

Read more here:

http://slapshot.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/30/keeping-score-which-team-has-the-right-stuff-to-win-the-cup/

Who Will Win the NBA Finals?

Here is an excerpt from our analysis on the NBA Finals, published in the NY Times:

Keeping Score: Championship Characteristics in the N.B.A. Finals

By CARLTON J. CHIN and JAY P. GRANAT

After analyzing the championship games or series of the N.F.L., N.B.A., Major League Baseball and N.H.L., and the major finals in golf and tennis, we identified 50 championships characteristics in our book, “Who Will Win the Big Game? A Psychological and Mathematical Method.”

Based on this research, we focused on several championship characteristics that might help predict the winner of the N.B.A. finals, which start Tuesday night in Miami.

Last year’s analysis highlighted leadership factors and correctly predicted that the Lakers would win the championship.

Read more here:

http://offthedribble.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/31/keeping-score-championship-characteristics-in-the-n-b-a-finals/

NCAA Men's Basketball Championship 2011

Thank you for the kind notes we have received about our NY Times article on the Final Four, championship characteristics, and "quant fact" predictions. 

Our "quant fact" traits remain the same in terms of which team is predicted to win the 2011 NCAA Men's Championship: UConn has more factors on its side (so our blog's "official prediction" will be UConn) -- although Butler has shown what experience and coaching can do!


Carlton Chin, CFA, is chief investment officer and founder of alternative asset fund manager Adamah / CARAT Capital.  Jay Granat, PhD, is a psychotherapist, sports psychologist, and founder of StayIntheZone.com.   

Final Four Factors - 2011

Here is an excerpt from our analysis of the Final Four of the 2011 Men's NCAA Basketball Tournament.

In our book, “Who Will Win the Big Game? A Psychological and Mathematical Method,” we analyzed the championship games or series of the N.F.L., N.B.A., Major League Baseball and N.H.L., and the major finals in golf and tennis, to identify championship characteristics. Based on that research, we are again focusing on the factors that might help predict the winner of the N.C.A.A. men’s basketball tournament. Last year’s analysis correctly predicted that Duke would win the championship, and that Butler would be a threat to Michigan State in the semifinals.

The championship factors and quant facts point to Connecticut and Butler advancing to the final.  These predictions will count for our blog's official "quant fact" selections.  We'll also clarify our quant fact prediction for the 2011 March Madness champion before Monday's Championship Game.

Read more here:
http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/02/keeping-score-the-traits-of-a-winning-team/

Springing into the Baseball Season (NY Times)

The baseball season is ready to get underway and here is some fun analysis we did for spring training -- and what it might mean for the regular season.  (By Carlton Chin, Don LaFronz & Jay Granat; picked up by the NY Times; here's an excerpt).

Spring training is almost over and your team has been red hot. Or maybe your team has had a tough spring. But who cares? It’s just spring training, right? Do wins and losses during spring training mean anything? To answer that, we analyzed whether spring training is connected to performance during the regular season.

Data shows that spring training can be a leading indicator for regular-season performance. In fact, some big surprises are sometimes predicted by spring training results. 

Read more here:
http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/29/divining-clues-from-spring-training-success/#more-41909

The article is by Carlton Chin, a fund manager for Adamah/CARAT and Don LaFronz, a financial adviser.  Jay Granat, a psychotherapist, contributed reporting.  

Super Bowl Stats

These numbers are not related to sport psychology (check our NY Times article out for that), but with the Super Bowl coming up, we thought you might find these stats interesting.

Will the Game be Close?

We've been spoiled lately, because many of the recent Super Bowls have been close and exciting games.  In particular, 4 of the last 7 games have been decided by 4 points or less.  

And, due to the nature of the game (Conference Champions are competing!), many fans expect close games. However, do you remember the blowouts we've had in the past? Let's take a look at what the past Super Bowl numbers say:

• About two-thirds of Super Bowls are decided by 10 points or more, and
• About 50% of the games have been decided by 14 points or more.

How Many Points Might be Scored?

Here's a look at the average total points scored in the Super Bowl, by half, and in total. We looked at three sets of games: every Super Bowl, games since 1983 and games since 1994 (the years listed in the charts are based on the regular season; this includes every Super Bowl through Feb. 2009, excludes last year).

	1st Half	2nd Half	Total
All Super Bowls	21.3	24.1	45.4
83-08	23.6	26.9	50.5
94-08	21.6	27.3	48.9

How do Underdogs perform in the Super Bowl?

Recent underdogs have performed well in the Super Bowl:

• 3-0 in the last three Super Bowls,
• 7-2 in the last 9 Super Bowls, and
• 9-4 in the last 13 Super Bowls.

However, if we look at every Super Bowl played, the underdogs are:

• 20-21-3 in forty-four Super Bowl games. Slightly subpar, with 3 pushes.
• When the point spread is 5 points or less (like this year), the underdog is 9-8.

Super Bowl Square Pool Probabilities (NY Times)

If you are in a Square Pool, the New York Times published our Super Bowl Square Pool Probabilities last year (both online and "in print" on Super Bowl Sunday).  The charts show the probability of winning a Square Pool by quarter, based on the underdog and favorite.  To use the probability charts this season:

• replace last year's underdog, the Saints with the Steelers, and 
• replace the favorite, the Colts, with the Packers.  

Then, look up the numbers you received to view your chances of winning any particular quarter. 

Special thanks to Don LaFronz, a financial advisor and good friend, who originated the idea and helped devise the methodology.

Carlton Chin is a graduate of MIT and a fund manager at Adamah / CARAT Capital.  Jay Granat is a psychotherapist and founder of StayIntheZone.com.  

Super Bowl Quant Facts & Sports Psychology (NY Times)

Here is an excerpt from our article, picked up by the NY Times, where we try to quantify key concepts of sports psychology to study methods of building and developing winning teams and champions.

In our book, “Who Will Win the Big Game?,” we studied factors related to sports psychology that might help predict the winner of the Super Bowl. The results are based on every Super Bowl starting in January 1967, or forty-four games. With an eye towards key concepts of sport psychology, as well as statistical analysis that attempts to identify factors that are as independent from one another as possible, five key statistical factors were identified. These statistics are related to principles of sport psychology like experience, leadership, error control and consistency. So important are these concepts to winning championships that they have proven to be common themes across all major sports. Last year these factors accurately predicted a Saints’ victory over the Colts.

Jay Granat and Carlton Chin study and quantify championship characteristics related to sport psychology.  They are particularly interested in qualities that are more readily coached, taught, and practiced.

The entire article can be found at NYTimes.com: (entire link below)
http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/03/keeping-score-which-stats-can-predict-a-super-bowl-winner/

With Djokovich winning the championship at the Australian Open, our blog's "quant fact" predictions have compiled a 20-10 record -- often picking underdogs to win major championships.

We'll have more Super Bowl info on our blog over the next few days.

Championship Traits that Win World Series

Please check out our article on the World Series featuring the Texas Rangers and the San Francisco Giants.


Excerpt:

After analyzing the championship games or series of the N.F.L., N.B.A., Major League Baseball and N.H.L., and the major finals in golf and tennis, we identified 50 championships characteristics in our book, “Who Will Win the Big Game? A Psychological and Mathematical Method.”

... these championship characteristics were identified by looking at World Series results, so let’s review the factors again in analyzing the World Series matchup between the San Francisco Giants and the Texas Rangers.
_____________
Click here for the article:
http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/27/which-team-has-world-series-winning-characteristics/

Carlton Chin, co-founder of Adamah Capital, an alternative investment manager specializing in managed futures (with George Parr) -- and Jay Granat, founder of StayInTheZone.com, are authors of "Who Will Win the Big Game? A Psychological & Mathematical Method." They have previously written about the N.B.A. finals, the N.F.L. playoffs, and the N.C.A.A. men’s basketball tournament for the New York Times.