A Tournament of Champs: The GOAT of Men's Olympic Hockey

 With the 2022 Winter Olympic Games approaching, we present Part 2 of our series of articles on which Olympic Men’s Hockey team is the greatest of all time (GOAT). In Part 1 (2017) of our work, we used analytics and statistics to study the best Olympic hockey teams in history.

Which is the Greatest Olympic Hockey Team of All-Time Based on Stats and Computer Simulations?

Co-authored by Carlton Chin, founder of CARAT / Adamah Capital. Carlton, a graduate of MIT, is a quant researcher…

www.huffpost.com

In Part 2 of the series, we perform computer simulations to run tournaments of the best Olympic teams in history. Readers may want to read Part 1 of our article to see the main inputs and metrics (such as ELO, tournament performance, and more) that comprise our computer sim. Our goal is to blend statistical facts and information including, but not limited to, categories of offense, defense, goaltending, strength of schedule, talent, preparation, tactics, and more.

Similar to our first article, we include Gold medal teams since 1932. We also included the 1980 Soviet team, which was upset by the 1980 USA “Miracle on Ice” team. Part 2 has been updated to reflect additional thoughts, especially related to how a a hot goaltender can drive teams to Olympic hockey gold.

Read more here: 

https://carltonjchin.medium.com/a-computer-sim-tournament-to-determine-the-goat-of-mens-olympic-hockey-e6dde632ad7a

Carlton Chin holds both graduate and undergraduate degrees from MIT, and is an investment officer and portfolio strategist. When not studying downside risk and portfolio construction, he enjoys applying numbers and probability to sports analytics. He has worked with various sports organizations, including the Sacramento Kings — and has been quoted by the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and ESPN.

Jon Hartley and Bob Gibson contributed reporting. Jon Hartley is an economist, policy expert, and member of Forbes’ 30 under 30 (2017). Jon has worked with the Dallas Cowboys in sports analytics and has been featured by CNBC, Forbes, and the Huffington Post. Jon holds degrees from Harvard, Wharton, and the U of Chicago — and is a PhD candidate at Stanford. Bob Gibson is a fan and historian of Olympic Hockey.

Andy Murray takes Wimbledon!

Less than a year ago, we had a popular post on our blog about Andy Murray's win at the U.S. Open -- and his relationship with new coach, Ivan Lendl.  The blog post talks about their relationship, Lendl's history -- and tennis tactics.

At the time, it appeared that Andy Murray had "gotten over the hump" -- and that perhaps the added confidence could take him to other Grand Slam titles.  Fast forward nine months -- and that is, indeed, the case.  This past week, Murray continued the stretch of confidence that has now brought him the Wimbledon crown -- and perhaps will challenge for the #1 spot in the tennis world.

Andy Murray's story is great for sports psychology and persistence -- and in particular, the power of:

• Confidence,
• Mental toughness, and
• Coaching.

Sports & Tennis fans: please complete our poll on the left-hand-side!

Repeatability: Consistency, Athletes & Traders?!?

Here's an excerpt from an article we wrote that makes the analogy between systematic approaches that financial traders apply AND rituals or habits that athletes use (to improve repeatability, and consistency).

Interestingly, psychotherapist and founder of StayInTheZone.com, Dr. Jay Granat notes that athletes use similar systematic techniques. Granat encourages his clients to come up with their own "ritual" to help with focus. This can take the form of tennis players bouncing the tennis ball three times before serving, or baseball batters taking several practice swings before each pitch, for example. 

In some ways, these rituals and habits are designed to improve repeatability -- and are an athlete's method of systematizing his or her approach.  Dr. Granat, who has worked with athletes of all levels, including Olympic gold medalists, has also worked with professional traders. 

Please read more here:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/879811-improving-investment-decisions-with-quantitative-analysis

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

Quant Fact Predictions now 23-11

Since "Who Will Win the Big Game?" (A Psychological and Mathematical Approach) was published about a year-and-a-half ago, the book's analysis and "quant fact" predictions have made it into the NY Times and Wall Street Journal -- as well as other media outlets.

Jay Granat and Carlton Chin quantify key concepts of sports psychology -- and with the recent March Madness article in the New York Times -- the book's blog's predictions have now put together a 23-11 record.  The "quant facts" sometimes point to surprises and upsets, so the 23-11 record shows the importance of championship characteristics such as experience, leadership (both on the field and coaching), consistency, and minimizing errors.


Jay Granat, PhD is a sports psychologist and founder of StayInTheZone.com.  Carlton Chin, CFA, is a portfolio manager and quantitative researcher for Adamah Capital, a hedge fund specializing in alternative assets & Computer Aided Research & Trading (CARAT).  Jay and Carlton are particularly interested in certain factors that can be coached and practiced.  Their research has shown that these traits can help sports organizations improve performance -- and win championships.  

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/

Granat Interviewed by CBS on Jets

Dr. Granat, co-author of the book, "Who Will Win the Big Game? A Psychological & Mathematical Approach," by Carlton Chin & Jay Granat, was interviewed by CBS. Granat discusses sports psychology concepts such as confidence and mental toughness. Below is an excerpt from the interview. The entire link is below, which has a video clip:

“His freewheeling style; his playful style is freeing up the players, at least this group of players to perform to their fullest potential,” Dr. Granat said.

"I think he thinks out what he’s gonna do before he does it very often. Take a second look, because you can’t argue with success,” Dr. Granat said.

And Dr. Granat said psychologically, when looking at Rex Ryan you can’t forget the impact of his legendary coach father, Buddy Ryan.

“That family style, this is the way they approach the game. They’re not soft-spoken. They’re tough. They’re probably mentally tough. They believe in themselves. And they’d rather err on the side of being overconfident than under-confident,” Dr. Granat said.

Some opponents and teams say Rex Ryan is crazy. But if you talk to a sports psychologist, what you hear is crazy … like a fox.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/01/18/fans-jets-rex-may-indeed-be-crazy-like-a-fox/

NBA Finals Analysis -- in NY Times

http://offthedribble.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/03/which-team-has-the-right-stuff-to-win-the-title/?scp=1&sq=carlton%20chin&st=cse

Excerpt:

This year’s N.B.A. finals present an interesting case. The two leadership factors point to the Lakers (coaching and star leadership), but the statistical factors (defense and consistency) favor the Celtics. Note, however, that the leadership factors have been the stronger factors over the years.

March Madness: Final Four

Our analysis for the Final Four was picked up by the NY Times.

Below is an excerpt; click here for the entire article:

http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/02/keeping-score-which-team-is-built-to-win/

Over the past 25 tournaments, 14 of 25 champions have had Final Four experience from the previous three years. This factor favors Michigan State, the only remaining team that has a recent Final Four appearance (2009). Big game experience has proven to be one of the strongest and most consistent championship characteristics in every sport we have studied. Experience is related to confidence, focus, successfully managing big moments and relaxed aggression. On average, teams and athletes that have more big game experience have won about 70 percent of championship games.

Coaching leadership is also a key ingredient. This factor favors Duke and Coach Mike Krzyzewski’s 10-7 record once he reaches Final Four. Michigan State’s Tom Izzo has been to five previous Final Fours, but he is only 3-4 in the national semifinals and finals, winning one championship. West Virginia’s Bob Huggins lost his only Final Four game, while Butler Coach Brad Stevens is in his first national semifinal.

Leadership on the court is also important. Over the past 25 years, teams with more All-Americans have gone 11-7 in championship games. This factor points to Duke and West Virginia, each with one All-American, as opposed to Michigan State and Butler, with none.....

1980 Miracle on Ice: Quantifying Sport Psychology

The New York Times published an abridged version of our white paper on the 1980 Miracle on Ice. Please see below for the article and some text. Our white paper goes into more specifics of concepts of sport psychology, reviews specific examples of team chemistry and motivation -- and shows more results / details about our Monte Carlo simulations.

http://vancouver2010.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/22/how-miraculous-was-the-miracle/?scp=1&sq=miraculous%20miracle&st=cse

Some text from the article:

Today is the 30th anniversary of “The Miracle on Ice,” the stunning victory of the United States men’s hockey team over the Soviet Union in the 1980 Winter Olympics in Lake Placid. The young American team of amateurs went on to win the gold medal against Finland two days later.

But how big an upset was it? Using quantitative methods and Monte Carlo simulations, we studied the magnitude of the 1980 victory. Sport psychology played a big role in the Americans winning the gold medal and helped bridged the gap from 1,000-to-1 odds, down to a more manageable level of a 17-1 long-shot.

Brooks used just about every trick in the sport psychology book.

He graduated from college with a degree in psychology, and was a successful college coach at University of Minnesota, winning three championships in four finals appearances.

Brooks gave each prospect a psychology test to help him select a certain type of player.

Brooks said, "I'm not looking for the best players... I'm looking for the right players."

Sport Psychology Quant Facts

We enjoy studying principles of sport psychology and analyzing how we can help athletes and teams improve. We use mathematics and quantitative methods to analyze the impact of these factors.

In particular, we are interested in concepts of sport psychology that are more-readily taught, practiced, and coached. Our research has shown that many of these factors -- as well as many of the fundamentals of each particular sport -- are key championship characteristics.

This has been a common theme across all of the sports we have studied.

______________

Some of our research has been used to predict winners in championship matches. Please let us know if you have any interesting ideas for the Olympics or March Madness. Stay-tuned for an interesting article on the Olympics.

Super Bowl Recap

Thanks for the emails and correspondence from readers who found our blog from the Wall Street Journal and New York Times articles. People seemed to enjoy our article on the Super Bowl Square Pools in the NY Times' Super Bowl Sunday spread:

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

as well as our Super Bowl information:

http://whowillwinthebiggame.blogspot.com/2010/02/who-will-win-super-bowl-part-2.html

http://whowillwinthebiggame.blogspot.com/2010/02/super-bowl-quant-facts.html

One of our friends pointed out that including the College Football title game (1-0) and Australian Open (9-4), predictions on our blog have gone a combined 11-4. Not that we're counting (well, I guess we are...).

Carlton Chin and Jay Granat study principles of sport psychology and are particularly interested in key factors that can help teams and athletes improve -- and that are more easily coached and practiced.

Who Will Win the Super Bowl? PART 2 (2010)

Some of our readers asked us to be more definitive about who we really like in the Super Bowl. In our previous post on this topic, we had 3 factors in favor of the Saints (leadership/errors, confidence, and consistency-rushing game), and 2 factors in favor of the Colts (experience and consistency-defense).

If we use some additional factors from our research, that also are correlated with winning the Super Bowl, in total, we have 6 "sport psychology stat" factors favoring the Saints, and 3 favoring the Colts.

• Sacks - a defensive category that is close, but favors the Saints.
• Takeaway-Giveaways - the Saints have been strong in this category this season.
• Defense (Fewer Passing Yards / Attempt) - a defensive category that favors the Colts.
• Fewer Fumbles - weirdly enough, this is a negative indicator. Some analysts have said that fumbles are "luck of the draw," more of a random event, as opposed to QB interceptions, that are an important part of a QB's skill set. Perhaps this leads to teams focusing on holding on to the ball -- but net-net -- this factor favors the Saints.

Thus, we now have 6 factors favoring the Saints, and 3 factors favoring the Colts. 

Jay Granat, founder of www.stayinthezone.com, and Carlton Chin study and quantify championship characteristics related to sport psychology. We are particularly interested in qualities that are more readily coached, taught, and practiced.