Georgia Bulldog John Isner just won the most epic tennis match ever played in the history of man.
If you're scoring at home: Isner wins 6-4, 3-6, 6-7, 7-6, 70-68.
#dawgs #legend #DamnGoodDawg
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
6-4, 3-6, 6-7, 7-6, 59-59. Win Lose or Tie, Isner Wins. Go Dawgs!
Remember 3 years ago when Isner was Athens' very own
6'9" John Mayer with a 130 mph serve? Fun Times.
There have already been literally millions of clever comments written about his situation over the last 24 hours. On twitter alone. Nevermind the rest of the internet.
So here's the best writeup that I could find in 2 minutes flat. It'll tell you everything you need to know.
Except this:
I don't know Isner, I've never personally met him, but I have watched him do his thing front the front row, and in a not dissimilar situation where he performed like the #2 collegiate tennis player should yet still was denied victory by cruel fate (and a Pepperdine hooker). And I'm here to tell you the dude is a straight up badass. Add to that he's an almost 7 foot tall ringer for John Mayer and we're getting into legend territory even before today's theater of the absurd.
Win, lose, or draw, Isner will spend the rest of his life in the company of tennis immortals. Just like Russell Henley, who at age 20 just beat 120 professional golfers at the US Open at Pebble Beach last week while still smiling and interacting with fans then said "naw homey, keep your money, I'm an amateur & I'm not selling out for all that cash to give up on my remaining goals as an amateur golfer', John Isner is shining like a mofo for the Bulldog Nation right about now.
You don't always have to win the championship, save the day or get the girl to make your community proud. You just have to do your best, and whether that results in failure or epic front page, whole world is tripping on you success, know this: every single member of the University Of Georgia family is proud as hell of you.
So keep shining John Isner and know we're all behind you . That said, here's hoping you come out on top Friday afternoon 234-232.
and that's another... Bulldog. Point. Of. Pride.*
*Sponsored by Golden Flake- the official potato chip of the Southeastern Conference.
¡GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLL!!!
Don't get me wrong, Ian Darke- your call on ESPN was damn near perfect. That said, man am I ever glad that I turned it back over to Univision at half time.
Landon Donovan Is The New Mike Eruzione
And Ian Darke now has a seat at the table of owners of the most famous sports calls in American history.
h/t to Brian Cook over at mgoblog, which you should be reading on the regular
USA 1-0 Algeria. Comfortable Win; Never In Doubt.
Landon Donovan is the new Mike Eruzione. And the United States of America is now a soccer nation.
Don't like to brag, but I fucking called it.
Don't like to brag, but I fucking called it.
The USA Won't Just Qualify Today. They Will Win Outright.
This is why the US will not just qualify today against Algeria, they will win the game outright, become the next great American heroes, and start negotiating the movie rights for their now well known and about-to-explode World Cup 2010 story.
Karma
After being victim of arguably the greatest screw job in the long & storied history of the World Cup, in which they would have become the first team in World Cup history to come from a 0-2 defect to win 3-2, this team has a massive, massive bulk of karma coming its way
Revenge
Not revenge against any team or group in particular, and although millions of people around the world would love to see them get revenge against the now most famous referee in the history of the world, they don't want a piece of him either. They want revenge on the universe for denying them what was herocially earned and rightfully theirs, and they are PISSED OFF and chomping at the bit to get back out on the field and execute their revenge and be the newly minted Captain Americas.
Does this look like someone who is not 100% ready to kick ass & take names?
Hope
More Americans, and people around the world for that matter, are aware of and interested in the USA's game today. The players know this, and they know that right at this moment, they have something not yet seen in American soccer: thanks to a single bad decision, their entire nation is yearning, nay, aching for them to set this wrong right. We Americans haven't hoped so hard for a particular result in any contest since 53% of us hoped Obama right into the White House in the fall of 2008. After 100 years of irrelevance in the landscape of American sport, this is the biggest chance the USMNT may ever get to foment the tipping point for soccer in America, and they know it.
Fortune
They pre-ordered the new & improved (hahaha) Jabulani World Cup ball from adidas at the beginning of the MLS season, and some of their players who ply their trade in MLS are farther ahead on the learning curve than other teams such as Algeria who are still learning to adjust. See: Landon Donovan.
Fate
The referee's decision has become the biggest story in world sport over the last few days, but it's legacy has yet to be determined. That comes today, and the stakes are ridiculously high: lose, or draw and get knocked out by the cruelty of circumstance, and their story immediately becomes one of the most famous sporting debacles in this country and will never be forgotten. Win, or draw and qualify, then they are the heroes who conquered this problem and rendered it irrelevant to the point that in 20 years it will just be a historical footnote rather then the first thing every American reads about in the year 2248 when they instantly Google "USA World Cup 2010" with their mind. The players are aware of this, and know they have a chance make the referee scandal a historical footnote rather than their legacy for the rest of time.
Conclusion
A 300 pound pit bull on steroids and meth is about to get released, and as solid and capable as Algeria are, and as difficult as they are to break down defensively & dangerous as they can be on the counter-attack, they are simply the poor team to find themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Visual Representation of USA When The Whistle Blows at 7am PST Today
one, two, one, two, three, four...
Yeah!
International Underground,
Thunder pounds,
when I stomp the ground. (Wooh)
Like a million elephants,
or silver back orangutangs,
you can't stop the train.
Who wants some?
Don't come unprepared.
I'll be there,
but when I leave there.
Bet I be a household name...
Prediction
A cagey close game where the US hold a nervy 1 goal lead until they finally go 2 goals up. The Algerians will not give up like North Korea did, and in the spirit of their most famous son Zinedine Zidane will fight to the end in hopes of an injury time 2 goal miracle comeback of some sort. But it won't matter, for when the clock strikes 90 + whatever the referee chooses to add on, the USMNT will be on the cover of the Wheaties box.
Karma
After being victim of arguably the greatest screw job in the long & storied history of the World Cup, in which they would have become the first team in World Cup history to come from a 0-2 defect to win 3-2, this team has a massive, massive bulk of karma coming its way
Revenge
Not revenge against any team or group in particular, and although millions of people around the world would love to see them get revenge against the now most famous referee in the history of the world, they don't want a piece of him either. They want revenge on the universe for denying them what was herocially earned and rightfully theirs, and they are PISSED OFF and chomping at the bit to get back out on the field and execute their revenge and be the newly minted Captain Americas.
Does this look like someone who is not 100% ready to kick ass & take names?
Hope
More Americans, and people around the world for that matter, are aware of and interested in the USA's game today. The players know this, and they know that right at this moment, they have something not yet seen in American soccer: thanks to a single bad decision, their entire nation is yearning, nay, aching for them to set this wrong right. We Americans haven't hoped so hard for a particular result in any contest since 53% of us hoped Obama right into the White House in the fall of 2008. After 100 years of irrelevance in the landscape of American sport, this is the biggest chance the USMNT may ever get to foment the tipping point for soccer in America, and they know it.
Fortune
They pre-ordered the new & improved (hahaha) Jabulani World Cup ball from adidas at the beginning of the MLS season, and some of their players who ply their trade in MLS are farther ahead on the learning curve than other teams such as Algeria who are still learning to adjust. See: Landon Donovan.
Fate
The referee's decision has become the biggest story in world sport over the last few days, but it's legacy has yet to be determined. That comes today, and the stakes are ridiculously high: lose, or draw and get knocked out by the cruelty of circumstance, and their story immediately becomes one of the most famous sporting debacles in this country and will never be forgotten. Win, or draw and qualify, then they are the heroes who conquered this problem and rendered it irrelevant to the point that in 20 years it will just be a historical footnote rather then the first thing every American reads about in the year 2248 when they instantly Google "USA World Cup 2010" with their mind. The players are aware of this, and know they have a chance make the referee scandal a historical footnote rather than their legacy for the rest of time.
Conclusion
A 300 pound pit bull on steroids and meth is about to get released, and as solid and capable as Algeria are, and as difficult as they are to break down defensively & dangerous as they can be on the counter-attack, they are simply the poor team to find themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Visual Representation of USA When The Whistle Blows at 7am PST Today
one, two, one, two, three, four...
Yeah!
International Underground,
Thunder pounds,
when I stomp the ground. (Wooh)
Like a million elephants,
or silver back orangutangs,
you can't stop the train.
Who wants some?
Don't come unprepared.
I'll be there,
but when I leave there.
Bet I be a household name...
Prediction
A cagey close game where the US hold a nervy 1 goal lead until they finally go 2 goals up. The Algerians will not give up like North Korea did, and in the spirit of their most famous son Zinedine Zidane will fight to the end in hopes of an injury time 2 goal miracle comeback of some sort. But it won't matter, for when the clock strikes 90 + whatever the referee chooses to add on, the USMNT will be on the cover of the Wheaties box.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Maradona to World: ¡Sigue Chupando! Part II
Diego Maradona is in a class of two: along with Pele, he is either the greatest soccer player to ever touch a ball or the 2nd greatest. Opinions on who belongs where are very divided, but whatever camp people are in they readily acknowledge that the other guy, if not as good as their guy, is clearly #2, not to be lumped in with the next group of players below them(#3 to #10 approximately).
Diego Maradona as a national team manager? Too early to tell how effective, successful or popular he will become in this role, for he is still on the early part of this new journey. What is absolutely certain is that he is already one of the most colorful, entertaining, and possibly batshit crazy coaches of all time, although he might actually have us all fooled into thinking he is an insane fool when he's really a genius who is just on some next level shit that we cannot even begin to fathom.
His incredible resume of recent accomplishments, sane and insane, is well documented. However, one incident in particular is worth reviewing because it is quickly becoming a theme and a mantra that just might propel El Loco Diego and his band of supremely talented footballers all the way to the final and perhaps even the land of milk and honey that lays beyond: Argentina's 3rd World Cup title.
The Summer of ¡Sigue Chupando!
When Argentina finally qualified for this World Cup, on the very final day, El Diego used the post game press conference to defiantly put his critics in the Argentine press, and Argentina in general, in their place. And he did it in pure Diego fashion: he told them on live television beamed all around the world, to "suck it. and keep on sucking". In Espanol: "sigue chupando."
Sigue chupando: a movement is born
He was laughed at, mocked, and labeled a hothead crackpot for the billionth time.
World Cup 2010 Mid-Term Report Card
Name: Maradona, Diego Armando
Games played: 3
Wins: 3
Goals scored: 7
Goals conceded: 1
Groups easily won: 1 (Group A, 2010 World Cup)
Allegedly over the hill old timers who he controversially selected over higher profile younger players who appeared to be in better form: 2 (Martin Palermo, 37. Juan Sebastian Veron, 35)
Mid-Term grade: A+++++
Madman or Genius? The jury's still out, and there will certainly be opportunities to do something incredibly stupid in the win or go home knockout stage that costs your team an excellent shot at winning the world cup, but at this point people are flocking over from the madman camp to the genius camp faster than wall street hedge fund managers switching their position on Bear Sterns in September 2008.
Prediction
His personal motto for the last 6 months has now become the mantra of the Argentine team, and just might carry them all the way to the World Cup final and possibly even the promised land. After all, he's single handedly done it before with his feet, so do not doubt that he can do it with his allegedly crazy mind when at his disposal is arguably the greatest assembly of soccer talent in this World Cup, Spain & Brasil included.
In other words, welcome to The Summer Of ¡SIGUE CHUPANDO!
Diego Maradona as a national team manager? Too early to tell how effective, successful or popular he will become in this role, for he is still on the early part of this new journey. What is absolutely certain is that he is already one of the most colorful, entertaining, and possibly batshit crazy coaches of all time, although he might actually have us all fooled into thinking he is an insane fool when he's really a genius who is just on some next level shit that we cannot even begin to fathom.
His incredible resume of recent accomplishments, sane and insane, is well documented. However, one incident in particular is worth reviewing because it is quickly becoming a theme and a mantra that just might propel El Loco Diego and his band of supremely talented footballers all the way to the final and perhaps even the land of milk and honey that lays beyond: Argentina's 3rd World Cup title.
The Summer of ¡Sigue Chupando!
When Argentina finally qualified for this World Cup, on the very final day, El Diego used the post game press conference to defiantly put his critics in the Argentine press, and Argentina in general, in their place. And he did it in pure Diego fashion: he told them on live television beamed all around the world, to "suck it. and keep on sucking". In Espanol: "sigue chupando."
Sigue chupando: a movement is born
He was laughed at, mocked, and labeled a hothead crackpot for the billionth time.
World Cup 2010 Mid-Term Report Card
Name: Maradona, Diego Armando
Games played: 3
Wins: 3
Goals scored: 7
Goals conceded: 1
Groups easily won: 1 (Group A, 2010 World Cup)
Allegedly over the hill old timers who he controversially selected over higher profile younger players who appeared to be in better form: 2 (Martin Palermo, 37. Juan Sebastian Veron, 35)
Mid-Term grade: A+++++
Madman or Genius? The jury's still out, and there will certainly be opportunities to do something incredibly stupid in the win or go home knockout stage that costs your team an excellent shot at winning the world cup, but at this point people are flocking over from the madman camp to the genius camp faster than wall street hedge fund managers switching their position on Bear Sterns in September 2008.
Prediction
His personal motto for the last 6 months has now become the mantra of the Argentine team, and just might carry them all the way to the World Cup final and possibly even the promised land. After all, he's single handedly done it before with his feet, so do not doubt that he can do it with his allegedly crazy mind when at his disposal is arguably the greatest assembly of soccer talent in this World Cup, Spain & Brasil included.
In other words, welcome to The Summer Of ¡SIGUE CHUPANDO!
Monday, June 21, 2010
Jabulani Explained by 2031 Brasilian TV Analyst Of The Year Felipe Melo
If last week's detailed explanation of the Jabulani situation(newly updated with supporting video evidence- go back for a 2nd read & be even more convinced) is too wordy for you by a factor of 200x, and you're the Gordon Gecko executive type with a massively inflated self worth who has an appointment with the crown prince of Dubai in 5 minutes, and you need to completely understand the biggest story in world sport this week in the next 300 seconds, then stop fiddling with the double windsor knot on your $400 power tie and pay attention because these two nice Canadian ladies are here to help:
Wow, next to a real ball Jabulani looks like it came from Toys R Us, eh?
If you didn't quite catch that amazing analysis by Brasil midfield star Felipe Melo because you were thinking "holy shit is this guy the Ron Artest of Brasil?" and missed some of the details, then that's ok. By the power of internet searching and trusty ol' cut & paste, I hereby present the mortal lock for color commentator of the year in Brasil circa 2031 and his eloquent summary of the Jabulani conundrum for fans of all ages:
“The ball is horrible, it’s hard to believe that such a ball will be used in a World Cup. The other ball is like a nagging woman: you kick her and she’s still there. This one is like a spoiled little rich kid, who doesn’t want to be kicked in any way.”
Aaaaaaand, done.
Wow, next to a real ball Jabulani looks like it came from Toys R Us, eh?
If you didn't quite catch that amazing analysis by Brasil midfield star Felipe Melo because you were thinking "holy shit is this guy the Ron Artest of Brasil?" and missed some of the details, then that's ok. By the power of internet searching and trusty ol' cut & paste, I hereby present the mortal lock for color commentator of the year in Brasil circa 2031 and his eloquent summary of the Jabulani conundrum for fans of all ages:
“The ball is horrible, it’s hard to believe that such a ball will be used in a World Cup. The other ball is like a nagging woman: you kick her and she’s still there. This one is like a spoiled little rich kid, who doesn’t want to be kicked in any way.”
Aaaaaaand, done.
Friday, June 18, 2010
Feel Good Friday: USMNT Shine Blocka Edition
In honor of Team USA's massive shafting by an abjectly miserable referee from Mali and his crew, I present to you Shine Blockas by one of the biggest pimps in these United States, Big Boi.
"Tryin' to block my shine just ain't gonna to happen so don't try..."
Keep grinding USMNT, we're all proud of you especially the amazing comeback today. Karma is on your side now too, and now there's a huge opportunity to go through to the knockout round, so reach out and grab it.
Big Boi's long-awaited(2 years!) new album Sir Luscious Left Foot: The Son Of Chico Dusty drops July 6. No less than 5 tracks from it are already floating around on the interwebs, so I'm only going to say this one: get it on July 6; it's incredible- you're welcome in advance.
"Tryin' to block my shine just ain't gonna to happen so don't try..."
Keep grinding USMNT, we're all proud of you especially the amazing comeback today. Karma is on your side now too, and now there's a huge opportunity to go through to the knockout round, so reach out and grab it.
Big Boi's long-awaited(2 years!) new album Sir Luscious Left Foot: The Son Of Chico Dusty drops July 6. No less than 5 tracks from it are already floating around on the interwebs, so I'm only going to say this one: get it on July 6; it's incredible- you're welcome in advance.
Team USA: The Math + The Path To The Knockout Stage*
***Update 2.15pm PST***
GROUP C
Slovenia 4 points
3 goals scored
2 goals against
+1 goal differential
United States 2 points
3 goals scored
3 goals against
0 goal differential
England 2 points
1 goal scored
1 goal against
0 goal differential
Algeria 1 point
0 goals scored
1 goals against
-1 goal differential
Wednesday June 23
USA v Algeria ESPN 7am PST
Slovenia v England ESPN2 7am PST
SCENARIOS
1. USA win over ALG and they're in no matter what
2. USA draw + they're in if:
a. SLV beat ENG
b. ENG-SLV draw, then it comes down to a big list of tiebreakers** between ENG & USA ending with the "drawing of lots" (coin flip to you & me) where the key will likely be total number of goals scored.The good great news is that we are current ahead of England by 2 goals in this department
3. US draw + ENG win over SLV = we're out
So there it is.
**FIFA World Cup 2010 List of Group Stage Tiebreakers (h/t fredericiana)
1. Goal difference in all group matches
2. Greatest number of goals scored in all group matches
3. Greatest number of points obtained in the group matches between the teams concerned
4. Goal difference resulting from the group matches between the teams concerned
5. Greater number of goals scored in all group matches between the teams concerned
6. Drawing of lots by the FIFA Organising Committee.
---------------------------
SLV 4 pts 2 games played
USA 2 pts 2 games played
ENG 1 pt 1 game played
ALG 0 pts 1 game played
If ENG beats ALG then:
1. US win + any result other than a draw in ENG-SLV = we're in
2. US win + ENG-SLV draw = USA, ENG, SLV all on 5 pts, 1st tiebreaker is goal difference, top 2 in GD are in
If ALG gets a draw today v. ENG then:
1. US win and they're in no matter what
2. US draw + they're in if:
a. SLV beat ENG
b. ENG-SLV draw, then it comes down to a big list of tiebreakers between ENG & USA w/ goals scored being the key
3. US draw + ENG win over SLV = we're out
If ALG beats ENG then:
1. US win = we're in no matter what
2. US draw or loss = we're out no matter what
CONCLUSION: the most American thing you can do right now is run out & buy an Algerian flag and root for them to get some sort of a result against the Evil Empire of George III. Bonus irony points if you're a conservative right winger.
*Someone please fact check this, as I'm on about 20 hours sleep the last 5 days.
GROUP C
Slovenia 4 points
3 goals scored
2 goals against
+1 goal differential
United States 2 points
3 goals scored
3 goals against
0 goal differential
England 2 points
1 goal scored
1 goal against
0 goal differential
Algeria 1 point
0 goals scored
1 goals against
-1 goal differential
Wednesday June 23
USA v Algeria ESPN 7am PST
Slovenia v England ESPN2 7am PST
SCENARIOS
1. USA win over ALG and they're in no matter what
2. USA draw + they're in if:
a. SLV beat ENG
b. ENG-SLV draw, then it comes down to a big list of tiebreakers** between ENG & USA ending with the "drawing of lots" (coin flip to you & me) where the key will likely be total number of goals scored.
3. US draw + ENG win over SLV = we're out
So there it is.
**FIFA World Cup 2010 List of Group Stage Tiebreakers (h/t fredericiana)
1. Goal difference in all group matches
2. Greatest number of goals scored in all group matches
3. Greatest number of points obtained in the group matches between the teams concerned
4. Goal difference resulting from the group matches between the teams concerned
5. Greater number of goals scored in all group matches between the teams concerned
6. Drawing of lots by the FIFA Organising Committee.
---------------------------
SLV 4 pts 2 games playedUSA 2 pts 2 games played
ENG 1 pt 1 game played
ALG 0 pts 1 game played
If ENG beats ALG then:
1. US win + any result other than a draw in ENG-SLV = we're in
2. US win + ENG-SLV draw = USA, ENG, SLV all on 5 pts, 1st tiebreaker is goal difference, top 2 in GD are in
If ALG gets a draw today v. ENG then:
1. US win and they're in no matter what
2. US draw + they're in if:
a. SLV beat ENG
b. ENG-SLV draw, then it comes down to a big list of tiebreakers between ENG & USA w/ goals scored being the key
3. US draw + ENG win over SLV = we're out
If ALG beats ENG then:
1. US win = we're in no matter what
2. US draw or loss = we're out no matter what
CONCLUSION: the most American thing you can do right now is run out & buy an Algerian flag and root for them to get some sort of a result against the Evil Empire of George III. Bonus irony points if you're a conservative right winger.
*Someone please fact check this, as I'm on about 20 hours sleep the last 5 days.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Adaptation, Finesse, and Jabulani. Also: Did Maradona Just Save World Cup 2010? Controversy Explained.
This is long, and wonky. If you want the Reader's Digest/ADD/Cliff Notes version, Felipe Melo's got you covered.
Preface- The Great Jabulani Controversy
I'm not here to convince you that the ball sucks and is the main reason for the low scoring, shots, and chances. I was barking that from the beginning and was just frustrated that so many people weren't seeing the obvious and calling a spade a spade- vuvuzelas do not affect the flight of the ball, and neither does altitude when the flight change is from spinning to knuckleballs. If you've watched any significant amount of professional soccer during, I don't know, say the last 10 years, then you know this: players have ridiculous control of the ball, and a huge chunk of beautiful goals are the result of players bending the ball by hitting it with power with the inside of the foot to make it curve and/or dip, sometimes as much as 10 feet and from as far out as 40 yards from goal. In other words, this is what we are used to seeing week in and week out from the world best players at club level:
You remember when TH14 was admired by neutrals don't you? It wasn't that long ago, really.
The best example of this I could find is Robert Pires' powerful bending goal away to Liverpool during Arsenal's famous "Invincibles" undefeated season in 2003-2004. Watch each replay of this goal, especially the last one, but more importantly listen to the commentary clearly explain that the key to this goal is hitting it with the inside of the foot and bending it with power. While you are watching it think about how many times you see this goal each week in say the EPL, La Liga, or any other professional league, and how through 18 games to date with the best players on the planet, we have yet to see it once.
"he bends it with power; that's the thing that beats the goalkeeper"
And it's not just Bend It Like Beckham; it's Bend It Like Any Moderately Talented Pro Footballer. In other words, it's commonplace and seen multiple times in any given match. So when the best players in the world play 16 games in a row without a single powerful shot from range spinning in this manner, let alone being on target or going into the goal, it's pretty simple to see that this ball simply DOES NOT SPIN. Any shot with power is flat and/or knuckles out of control, and takes off like an F-14 off the deck of an aircraft carrier.
Moving On
But now I'm less interested in convincing others of my world view and more interested in trying to figure out what will happen next: will players adapt, or is the angry juju of this ball untameable? And if they do adapt, how will they do it? Can this ball be mastered or will the players only get marginally better, leaving us with the lowest scoring and most disappointing World Cup in history?
I think the answer is becoming apparent, and it is good news for the billion or so of us humans caught up in this so far disappointing affair.
Finesse Will Set You Free
The players in this tournament have been striking the ball the same way to spin it with power to score amazing goals and put in pinpoint crosses for years if not decades, so their brains & bodies are hard wired for this. Change is not intuitive; rather, it is quite difficult to achieve with a simple wave of the note to self magic wand. But it has become readily apparent in the last 24 hours that just such a change is happening right before our eyes.
{damnit, now I remember why I hated your blog back in the day you longwinded bastard- get to the point... /half of audience leaves room}
OK, here's the dope: the way to get Jabulani to spin is to hit it not with power but with finesse, and we've seen a massive shift since yesterday morning. I first noticed it yesterday during Uruguay-SouthAfrica, especially from Diego Forlan. His dipping rocket shot goal thanks to a head deflection aside, I noticed that "holy shit he's spinning the ball on crosses better than anyone else I've seen", but didn't immediately see that he was doing this by taking a little power off of his kicks. But it really got me thinking about this question of adaptation to the ball.
Did El Diego Save The World Cup?
Then yesterday afternoon I saw this from Moin and immediately thought: holy shit this ball can be bent from distance. Eureka!
Mira:
Made even better by the soundtrack: "Queremos Paz" by Gotan Project
Later yesterday afternoon I thought "man, I wonder if, given the instant viral nature of youtube, and the worldwide takeover of social networking by the World Cup, if this will make it's way to any player/coach/team advisor, because one look at it and you can see the secret to unlock the mystery", but didn't really take my thought seriously.
Then I woke up today and watched Argentina 4-1 South Korea and man it seemed as if the secret was out. The game was certainly joint most enjoyable to watch with Germany 4-0 Australia {more on that in a minute} and it seemed like the players control on shots, crosses, and touches was significantly better. I started connecting the dots but immediately checked myself for being on some phony Dan Brown novel nonsense. But the thought lingered...
Then I watched Greece 2-1 Nigeria, and lo and behold the Nigerian goal was a free kick from 30 yards that spun like a 'regular' ball, and it was clearly hit softer than the default setting power bend shots that had universally failed in the 1st 16 games. Suddenly I'm Keanu Reeves: Whoa.
The rest of the match was more of the same, and if freaking Greece and 10 man Nigeria playing a cracking game with lots of chances and much better technical play can't convince me, then nothing will.
And I don't mean that I am convinced that it because of El Diego. It very well may be that in the days between their 1st & 2nd matches, teams figured this out by application of observation and adaptation by practice. After all, we're talking about the most talented people on this planet at the discipline of controlling a soccer ball. I'm just convinced that the finesse secret to unlock Jabulani is being applied in front of our very eyes; the reason behind it is secondary.
Conclusion
But as I sit here exhausted after watching two games from 4.30am this morning, this much seems indisputably clear:
1. Scoring in the first 16 games was 1.5 goals per game.
2. Scoring thusfar in 3 2nd round matches is 3.7 goals per game.
3. The level of play and thus enjoyment factor for fans/viewers has significantly increased from the 16 1st round games to the 3 (and counting) 2nd round matches.
And of the 4 "best" or "most enjoyable for neutrals to watch" games of the 19 played thusfar, 3 of those four are the last 3, all in the 2nd round and all in the last 24 hours. And this is the key: it's ultimately not about getting into a mathematical argument about comparing the goals scored per game, as that is the science of the game. The key is the art of the game: watch how players start to adapt their shooting, crossing, and lobbed passes by taking a little power off their kicks and using a little more finesse to get this ball to bend and submit to their will. Certainly not as much as any 'normal' ball that came before, but definitely more than what we saw in the first set of games.
Something is clearly happening. Whether or not it's practice, a viral video of Maradona giving every gamer the cheat code, or something else is not the important bit.
The important bit is that things are changing right before our eyes, in real time, and it's win win win win- the players, the fans, the haters, the world, are all the better for it. Have they mastered it? Of course not, there's still the rocket shot field goals into row Z, and there will be more. But I feel a corner has been turned, and I cannot wait to see Mexico-France and the games tomorrow to apply my theory with an increased sample size.
Watch Germany
Universally hailed as the only truly great technical performance of the 32 teams in the 1st set of games was Germany's 4-0 romp over hapless Australia. During the match I was thinking, "damn, Germany are playing like Adidas secretly gave them this Jabulani ball to practice with 2 years ago". We later found out that this is true, except the secret part- the German Bundesliga teams all used the Adidas Jabulani ball last season, and most players on the German national team play on German clubs, so the German players have been using it day in and day our since at least last September. This article has an outstanding and thorough breakdown of who had access to Jabulani & when they had it- a must read for anyone with any passing interest in the Jabulani issue.
Having had this Jabulani eureka moment, I am looking forward to seeing their next match, but what I'd like even more is to go back and watch their first match and see if their play jives with my finesse theory. Given my schedule that might not happen for a few days, but if you're home with mono or otherwise bored off your ass today, go check it out.
Now it could be that I am way off and in desperate need of a full night's sleep (which is true regardless). But I really think we're witnessing the key going into the Jabulani lock, and I'm here to tell you first so you can be the rock star who points it out first to your mates, cause that's the guy who gets the girl's number at the sportsbar from the casually interested in soccer but ridiculously hot expat from an exotic country who's there to support her homeland, not the douche who waits for something to take hold and then acts like they knew it all along.
That said, either you're welcome or I'm sorry.
Small sample size I know, but what do you think? Am I observant or baked?
UPDATE
Jabulani Update with objective goals per match facts here.
*Please don't come at me in the comments about opening matches being cautious, cagey affairs. They are, but I am talking about physical evidence regarding the flight & spin of the ball, not emotional states & conservative tactics.
**Updated with video evidence to support my theory 21 June 2010
Preface- The Great Jabulani Controversy
I'm not here to convince you that the ball sucks and is the main reason for the low scoring, shots, and chances. I was barking that from the beginning and was just frustrated that so many people weren't seeing the obvious and calling a spade a spade- vuvuzelas do not affect the flight of the ball, and neither does altitude when the flight change is from spinning to knuckleballs. If you've watched any significant amount of professional soccer during, I don't know, say the last 10 years, then you know this: players have ridiculous control of the ball, and a huge chunk of beautiful goals are the result of players bending the ball by hitting it with power with the inside of the foot to make it curve and/or dip, sometimes as much as 10 feet and from as far out as 40 yards from goal. In other words, this is what we are used to seeing week in and week out from the world best players at club level:
You remember when TH14 was admired by neutrals don't you? It wasn't that long ago, really.
The best example of this I could find is Robert Pires' powerful bending goal away to Liverpool during Arsenal's famous "Invincibles" undefeated season in 2003-2004. Watch each replay of this goal, especially the last one, but more importantly listen to the commentary clearly explain that the key to this goal is hitting it with the inside of the foot and bending it with power. While you are watching it think about how many times you see this goal each week in say the EPL, La Liga, or any other professional league, and how through 18 games to date with the best players on the planet, we have yet to see it once.
"he bends it with power; that's the thing that beats the goalkeeper"
And it's not just Bend It Like Beckham; it's Bend It Like Any Moderately Talented Pro Footballer. In other words, it's commonplace and seen multiple times in any given match. So when the best players in the world play 16 games in a row without a single powerful shot from range spinning in this manner, let alone being on target or going into the goal, it's pretty simple to see that this ball simply DOES NOT SPIN. Any shot with power is flat and/or knuckles out of control, and takes off like an F-14 off the deck of an aircraft carrier.
Moving On
But now I'm less interested in convincing others of my world view and more interested in trying to figure out what will happen next: will players adapt, or is the angry juju of this ball untameable? And if they do adapt, how will they do it? Can this ball be mastered or will the players only get marginally better, leaving us with the lowest scoring and most disappointing World Cup in history?
I think the answer is becoming apparent, and it is good news for the billion or so of us humans caught up in this so far disappointing affair.
Finesse Will Set You Free
The players in this tournament have been striking the ball the same way to spin it with power to score amazing goals and put in pinpoint crosses for years if not decades, so their brains & bodies are hard wired for this. Change is not intuitive; rather, it is quite difficult to achieve with a simple wave of the note to self magic wand. But it has become readily apparent in the last 24 hours that just such a change is happening right before our eyes.
{damnit, now I remember why I hated your blog back in the day you longwinded bastard- get to the point... /half of audience leaves room}
OK, here's the dope: the way to get Jabulani to spin is to hit it not with power but with finesse, and we've seen a massive shift since yesterday morning. I first noticed it yesterday during Uruguay-SouthAfrica, especially from Diego Forlan. His dipping rocket shot goal thanks to a head deflection aside, I noticed that "holy shit he's spinning the ball on crosses better than anyone else I've seen", but didn't immediately see that he was doing this by taking a little power off of his kicks. But it really got me thinking about this question of adaptation to the ball.
Did El Diego Save The World Cup?
Then yesterday afternoon I saw this from Moin and immediately thought: holy shit this ball can be bent from distance. Eureka!
Mira:
Made even better by the soundtrack: "Queremos Paz" by Gotan Project
Later yesterday afternoon I thought "man, I wonder if, given the instant viral nature of youtube, and the worldwide takeover of social networking by the World Cup, if this will make it's way to any player/coach/team advisor, because one look at it and you can see the secret to unlock the mystery", but didn't really take my thought seriously.
Then I woke up today and watched Argentina 4-1 South Korea and man it seemed as if the secret was out. The game was certainly joint most enjoyable to watch with Germany 4-0 Australia {more on that in a minute} and it seemed like the players control on shots, crosses, and touches was significantly better. I started connecting the dots but immediately checked myself for being on some phony Dan Brown novel nonsense. But the thought lingered...
Then I watched Greece 2-1 Nigeria, and lo and behold the Nigerian goal was a free kick from 30 yards that spun like a 'regular' ball, and it was clearly hit softer than the default setting power bend shots that had universally failed in the 1st 16 games. Suddenly I'm Keanu Reeves: Whoa.
The rest of the match was more of the same, and if freaking Greece and 10 man Nigeria playing a cracking game with lots of chances and much better technical play can't convince me, then nothing will.
And I don't mean that I am convinced that it because of El Diego. It very well may be that in the days between their 1st & 2nd matches, teams figured this out by application of observation and adaptation by practice. After all, we're talking about the most talented people on this planet at the discipline of controlling a soccer ball. I'm just convinced that the finesse secret to unlock Jabulani is being applied in front of our very eyes; the reason behind it is secondary.
Conclusion
But as I sit here exhausted after watching two games from 4.30am this morning, this much seems indisputably clear:
1. Scoring in the first 16 games was 1.5 goals per game.
2. Scoring thusfar in 3 2nd round matches is 3.7 goals per game.
3. The level of play and thus enjoyment factor for fans/viewers has significantly increased from the 16 1st round games to the 3 (and counting) 2nd round matches.
And of the 4 "best" or "most enjoyable for neutrals to watch" games of the 19 played thusfar, 3 of those four are the last 3, all in the 2nd round and all in the last 24 hours. And this is the key: it's ultimately not about getting into a mathematical argument about comparing the goals scored per game, as that is the science of the game. The key is the art of the game: watch how players start to adapt their shooting, crossing, and lobbed passes by taking a little power off their kicks and using a little more finesse to get this ball to bend and submit to their will. Certainly not as much as any 'normal' ball that came before, but definitely more than what we saw in the first set of games.
Something is clearly happening. Whether or not it's practice, a viral video of Maradona giving every gamer the cheat code, or something else is not the important bit.
The important bit is that things are changing right before our eyes, in real time, and it's win win win win- the players, the fans, the haters, the world, are all the better for it. Have they mastered it? Of course not, there's still the rocket shot field goals into row Z, and there will be more. But I feel a corner has been turned, and I cannot wait to see Mexico-France and the games tomorrow to apply my theory with an increased sample size.
Watch Germany
Universally hailed as the only truly great technical performance of the 32 teams in the 1st set of games was Germany's 4-0 romp over hapless Australia. During the match I was thinking, "damn, Germany are playing like Adidas secretly gave them this Jabulani ball to practice with 2 years ago". We later found out that this is true, except the secret part- the German Bundesliga teams all used the Adidas Jabulani ball last season, and most players on the German national team play on German clubs, so the German players have been using it day in and day our since at least last September. This article has an outstanding and thorough breakdown of who had access to Jabulani & when they had it- a must read for anyone with any passing interest in the Jabulani issue.
Having had this Jabulani eureka moment, I am looking forward to seeing their next match, but what I'd like even more is to go back and watch their first match and see if their play jives with my finesse theory. Given my schedule that might not happen for a few days, but if you're home with mono or otherwise bored off your ass today, go check it out.
Now it could be that I am way off and in desperate need of a full night's sleep (which is true regardless). But I really think we're witnessing the key going into the Jabulani lock, and I'm here to tell you first so you can be the rock star who points it out first to your mates, cause that's the guy who gets the girl's number at the sportsbar from the casually interested in soccer but ridiculously hot expat from an exotic country who's there to support her homeland, not the douche who waits for something to take hold and then acts like they knew it all along.
That said, either you're welcome or I'm sorry.
Small sample size I know, but what do you think? Am I observant or baked?
UPDATE
Jabulani Update with objective goals per match facts here.
*Please don't come at me in the comments about opening matches being cautious, cagey affairs. They are, but I am talking about physical evidence regarding the flight & spin of the ball, not emotional states & conservative tactics.
**Updated with video evidence to support my theory 21 June 2010
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
{opens creaky door, turns on light, clears off dust, coughs}:
"Anybody still here?"
Some World Cup thoughts in my head that cannot be contained by 140 characters, especially re: Jabulani ball & what will happen from here on out/how players will adjust
Just need some time in next couple days to get it all down.
Watch this space...
Some World Cup thoughts in my head that cannot be contained by 140 characters, especially re: Jabulani ball & what will happen from here on out/how players will adjust
Just need some time in next couple days to get it all down.
Watch this space...
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Why I Love Horse Racing, Reason #734
From Steve Haskin's wonderful Kentucky Derby wrapup story, here's trainer Dick Mandella {who trained MINE THAT BIRD for 10 days last fall} talking about what makes the horse game special:
“But seriously, that horse looked fabulous. The trainer has done a great job with him. Just because a trainer doesn’t have a big stable doesn’t mean he’s not a good horseman. This goes to show what someone who has a lot of time to spend with one horse can do when that horse has talent. That’s the beauty of this game. Everybody’s got a chance. We don’t promote enough how equal and how fair this game can be. It has very little prejudice. This is the only business where a sheikh or member of a royal family will lean down to some minimum wage hotwalker or groom and say, ‘What do you think?’"
Well said, reminds me of why going to the Kentucky Derby is so much damn fun.
“But seriously, that horse looked fabulous. The trainer has done a great job with him. Just because a trainer doesn’t have a big stable doesn’t mean he’s not a good horseman. This goes to show what someone who has a lot of time to spend with one horse can do when that horse has talent. That’s the beauty of this game. Everybody’s got a chance. We don’t promote enough how equal and how fair this game can be. It has very little prejudice. This is the only business where a sheikh or member of a royal family will lean down to some minimum wage hotwalker or groom and say, ‘What do you think?’"
Well said, reminds me of why going to the Kentucky Derby is so much damn fun.
Monday, March 16, 2009
Get Your Brackets Right, Get 'Em Tight
Just because I'm too busy to blog these days doesn't mean that you shouldn't be able to take advantage of the fact that for many years I was an absolute college basketball nerd/wonk and as such have amassed some data that might help you tweak your brackets for maximum probability that you might crush the office pool. Plus it gave me a chance to work in a Ying Yang Twinz/Bubba Sparxxx reference with the post title {brackets brackets brackets brackets brackets everywhere...}.
So here is my bracket wonk post from last year, updated to include the 2008 tournament. Enjoy and good luck...
This isa little extremely wonky, so some of you will be interested and some will not, but what the hell. As a former hard core college basketball junkie and wonk, I figured the best I can offer this year is to share some of this info with you, as it may help you tweak your bracket before you submit it.
Disclaimer 1: this data should never be used to fill out a bracket; your bracket should always be filled out first using whatever methodology you use. This data can be helpful in perhaps going back and tweaking a few picks here and there to ensure that what you picked falls with the normal range over time of what has actually occurred, so that you don't submit something whose odds of happening are minuscule, thus reducing your chances of taking your co-workers money.
Disclaimer 2: As you will see when we get into the numbers below, 2007 was quite an anomaly; what in horse racing handicapping might be referred to as a "throw away" race because its result was such an outlier compared to the rest of the data. Anyhow, it can be looked at two ways: (1) that it makes all the rest of the data null and void and shows that truly anything can happen, or (2) that it was an anomaly and that over time the trends of the rest of the historical data will largely hold true.
Now then...
FIRST ROUND
First Round Upsets
Now look over your brackets and just compare the numbers that you have with this historical data. There is no need to adjust anything unless what you have is waaaaay out of range. I just try to make sure that I'm not way out of bounds. 2007 was very unusual in that it was only the 2nd time that all of the 2, 3, 4 and 5 seeds advanced to the 2nd round since the field expanded to 64 teams in 1985, so in 22 of the past 24 years there have been upsets over 5, 4, 3, and 2 seeds and we should expect them in any given year.
As most folks know, a 16 has never beaten a 1 seed. A 2 seed has only lost 4 times in the last 17 years, and never 2 in the same year, so for example if you have three different 2 seeds losing to 15 seeds, then you might want to adjust your picks and play the percentages. The 5/12 games get alot of publicity, but don't forget that a 13 seed beats a 4 seed more years than not, and the 11 seeds do pretty well against the 6 seeds. The 8v9 games are not listed because to me a 9 seed beating and 8 seed isn't really an upset. Again, just be sure that you are somewhere in the ballpark, or even on the edge or just a little out of bounds, but if you have all four 11 seeds beating the 6 seeds you may want to adjust. Hell it may happen this year, but if I was in an office pool I would want to maximize my percentages against the others and save the totally wacky-ass bullshit for talk at the sportsbar.
I typically compare my filled out bracket to these historical numbers to make sure that I am in/near the realm of what has happened on each matchup column.
SECOND ROUND
#1 Seed Losing In The Second Round
The recent conversion to the "pod" system has been especially kind to #1 seeds, as it has typically resulted in them playing in their home areas on quasi home courts rather than neutral courts, thus giving them an even bigger advantage over the underdog 8 or 9 seeds trying to upset them. All four 1 seeds get through to the 2nd weekend more often than not- in fact, they are on a 16 in a row streak in 2nd round games and have won 30 of the last 32 such encounters. So if you have all of your #1 seeds winning in round two then there is no need to worry. But if you have one, or even have the stones to pick two #1 seeds to lose to the winner of the 8v9 game then the data says you are not crazy but simply extremely bold, and to rock on with your bad self. If you have 3 or all 4 #1 seeds going out in the 2nd round, you may want to think about adjusting your picks.
#2 Seed Losing In The Second Round
On the other hand, you can clearly see that the #2 seeds fare much worse than the #1 seeds in round two. I won't get into why I think this is so, but you may want to think about having a 2 seed eat it in the second round, as all four haven't made it through to the Sweet Sixteen in 13 years, and that has only happened twice in the past 18 years. There's more on this below, but I tend to pick either what I perceive to be the weakest 2 seed to get upset here, or the one that I think has the worst potential matchup here.
THE SWEET SIXTEEN
Seeds Below 5 In the Sweet 16
Look at your brackets and count up the number of seeds below #5 seeds that you have in the Sweet Sixteen. 2007 was extremely chalky with top seeds advancing, and only 2 seeds below 5 made it to the 2nd weekend. In 17 of the last 18 years this number has been between 3 and 8, so ideally you would want to be in this range, but if you have 2 or 9 then I wouldn't worry too much. I also have listed the breakdown of the seeds that advanced each year in addition to the number of teams that made it this far.
The main trend to notice in this set of data is how well the 6 seeds do, as well as the winner of the 7v10 game {more on that in the next section though}. Historically 6 seeds have had success in the 2nd round against the winner of the 3v14 game, which by and large boils down to the fact that 6 seeds often upset 3 seeds in the 2nd round. In fact, every single year since 1991 at least one 6 seed makes it to the Sweet Sixteen, and often more than one do- the vast majority of their 2nd round wins come over 3 seeds. If I didn't have any 6 seeds in the Sweet Sixteen I would strongly consider going back and picking at least one of them to make it to the second weekend. The trick, of course, is picking the right one...
Bottom line at this point you don't want your bracket to be too chalky {you have all the top seeds advancing}, nor do you want it to be such an upset-o-rama that it is way outside the norm.
Double Digit Seeds In The Sweet 16
Look again at your Sweet 16: do you have any double digit seeds {10 seed or lower} in there? Again, 2007 was an anomaly but even including it, in 16 of the last 18 years at least 1 double digit seed has made it to the 2nd weekend.
Notice the trend here of how well the 10 seeds are represented. What does this mean? It means that if a 10 seed beats a 7 seed and matches up with a 2 seed in the 2nd round, that 2 seed should be on upset alert, because in 11 of the last 18 years at least one such 10 seed has beaten a 2 seed and gone through to the Sweet 16. For all the hype that the 12 seeds get in beating the 5 seed in the first round {the media always point out the the "classic 12 over 5 upset"}, the 10 seeds do even better than the 12 seeds in the 2nd round. Also, if you look back up at the data set before this one, and look at all of the 7 and 10 seeds, that tells you that the winner of the 7v10 game has a great shot of getting past the 2 seed and onto the Sweet Sixteen. I always pick what I think the weakest 2 seed is to lose {or if I think a 7/10 winner is especially strong, or if a 2 seed is a team that I hate and really would love to see go out}.
ELITE EIGHT
Seeds Below #3 In Elite Eight
Many beginners get to this point and have all #1 and #2 seeds. This is starting to sound like a broken record, but 2007 was an anomaly as it was the only time in the last 18 years that no team below a 3 seed made the Elite 8. Check your bracket for the number of teams seeded 4 or below in your final eight. You probably should have at least one, and if the data is an accurate predictor, not more than 5. Personally, I would be comfortable with between 1-3.
FINAL FOUR
Seeds Below #2 In Final Four
The last two years were rare, but it's too early to decide if this is a new trend or a blip in the traditional data, which shows that in 15 of the last 18 years at least one of the Final Four participants has been lower than a 2 seed. Also in 3 of the last 6 years at least 2 of the spots have gone to 3 seeds or lower. I would just make sure that you didn't have all four slots being 3 seeds or worse.
The Seeds Of The Final Four Participants
Last year I wrote: "If you have all four of the #1 seeds in your Final Four, then you are brave, for it has never happened."
Well, now it's happened. On the other hand, 2006 was the first time ever that none of the #1 seeds made it, so you never know.
I have seen the final four seeds wonked thusly: add up the seed #s of your final four members. In 15 of the last 18 years the number would be between 6 and 13, with wacky year 2000 having a high number of 15 and 2006's wackiness being an extreme outlier with at total of 20.
THE CHAMPIONSHIP GAME
Seeds Of The Championship Game Participants
Basically, the data says that you should have at least one #1 or #2 seed in the title game. If you have a 4 seed against a 6 seed here, then I applaud you for your moxie but the numbers say you won't win your office pool. In fact, then numbers say anything 3 v 3 or lower will not happen even though that sounds pretty feasible.
Seed Of The NCAA Champion
The outlier here is one of my favorite teams ever, the 1997 Arizona Wildcats, who amazingly beat three different #1 seeds en route to their championship, making them the only team to ever accomplish that feat and establishing a record that can only be equaled but never surpassed. Every other year the champion has been a 1, 2, or 3 seed, with a 1 seed winning it all in 12 of the last 18 years.
So there it is, by the numbers. Again, I am not saying to fill out your brackets to meet these requirements, but to fill out your brackets and then cross check them against this data, which should not be viewed as requirements but as a guideline or baseline or whatever you like.
I like this information because I find that it helps to know basically the number of upsets that likely will happen in each round. The trick, of course, is choosing where to pick your upsets and where to have the favorites advance. That, my friends, is what separates the office pool contributors from the office pool collectors.
Happy Brackets and best of luck. Unless you have Dook winning the national title that is - then I hope that you fail miserably.
So here is my bracket wonk post from last year, updated to include the 2008 tournament. Enjoy and good luck...
This is
Disclaimer 1: this data should never be used to fill out a bracket; your bracket should always be filled out first using whatever methodology you use. This data can be helpful in perhaps going back and tweaking a few picks here and there to ensure that what you picked falls with the normal range over time of what has actually occurred, so that you don't submit something whose odds of happening are minuscule, thus reducing your chances of taking your co-workers money.
Disclaimer 2: As you will see when we get into the numbers below, 2007 was quite an anomaly; what in horse racing handicapping might be referred to as a "throw away" race because its result was such an outlier compared to the rest of the data. Anyhow, it can be looked at two ways: (1) that it makes all the rest of the data null and void and shows that truly anything can happen, or (2) that it was an anomaly and that over time the trends of the rest of the historical data will largely hold true.
Now then...
FIRST ROUND
First Round Upsets
| Year | 15v2 | 14v3 | 13v4 | 12v5 | 11v6 | 10v7 |
| 2008 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| 2007 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| 2006 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 2005 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 2004 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 |
| 2003 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| 2002 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| 2001 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 2000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| 1999 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
| 1998 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| 1997 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| 1996 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
| 1995 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 1994 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
| 1993 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 1992 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| 1991 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
Now look over your brackets and just compare the numbers that you have with this historical data. There is no need to adjust anything unless what you have is waaaaay out of range. I just try to make sure that I'm not way out of bounds. 2007 was very unusual in that it was only the 2nd time that all of the 2, 3, 4 and 5 seeds advanced to the 2nd round since the field expanded to 64 teams in 1985, so in 22 of the past 24 years there have been upsets over 5, 4, 3, and 2 seeds and we should expect them in any given year.
As most folks know, a 16 has never beaten a 1 seed. A 2 seed has only lost 4 times in the last 17 years, and never 2 in the same year, so for example if you have three different 2 seeds losing to 15 seeds, then you might want to adjust your picks and play the percentages. The 5/12 games get alot of publicity, but don't forget that a 13 seed beats a 4 seed more years than not, and the 11 seeds do pretty well against the 6 seeds. The 8v9 games are not listed because to me a 9 seed beating and 8 seed isn't really an upset. Again, just be sure that you are somewhere in the ballpark, or even on the edge or just a little out of bounds, but if you have all four 11 seeds beating the 6 seeds you may want to adjust. Hell it may happen this year, but if I was in an office pool I would want to maximize my percentages against the others and save the totally wacky-ass bullshit for talk at the sportsbar.
I typically compare my filled out bracket to these historical numbers to make sure that I am in/near the realm of what has happened on each matchup column.
SECOND ROUND
#1 Seed Losing In The Second Round
| Year | Number |
| 2008 | 0 |
| 2007 | 0 |
| 2006 | 0 |
| 2005 | 0 |
| 2004 | 2 |
| 2003 | 0 |
| 2002 | 0 |
| 2001 | 0 |
| 2000 | 2 |
| 1999 | 0 |
| 1998 | 1 |
| 1997 | 0 |
| 1996 | 1 |
| 1995 | 0 |
| 1994 | 0 |
| 1993 | 0 |
| 1992 | 1 |
| 1991 | 0 |
The recent conversion to the "pod" system has been especially kind to #1 seeds, as it has typically resulted in them playing in their home areas on quasi home courts rather than neutral courts, thus giving them an even bigger advantage over the underdog 8 or 9 seeds trying to upset them. All four 1 seeds get through to the 2nd weekend more often than not- in fact, they are on a 16 in a row streak in 2nd round games and have won 30 of the last 32 such encounters. So if you have all of your #1 seeds winning in round two then there is no need to worry. But if you have one, or even have the stones to pick two #1 seeds to lose to the winner of the 8v9 game then the data says you are not crazy but simply extremely bold, and to rock on with your bad self. If you have 3 or all 4 #1 seeds going out in the 2nd round, you may want to think about adjusting your picks.
#2 Seed Losing In The Second Round
| Year | Number |
| 2008 | 2 |
| 2007 | 1 |
| 2006 | 2 |
| 2005 | 2 |
| 2004 | 2 |
| 2003 | 2 |
| 2002 | 1 |
| 2001 | 2 |
| 2000 | 3 |
| 1999 | 3 |
| 1998 | 1 |
| 1997 | 2 |
| 1996 | 0 |
| 1995 | 0 |
| 1994 | 1 |
| 1993 | 2 |
| 1992 | 1 |
| 1991 | 1 |
On the other hand, you can clearly see that the #2 seeds fare much worse than the #1 seeds in round two. I won't get into why I think this is so, but you may want to think about having a 2 seed eat it in the second round, as all four haven't made it through to the Sweet Sixteen in 13 years, and that has only happened twice in the past 18 years. There's more on this below, but I tend to pick either what I perceive to be the weakest 2 seed to get upset here, or the one that I think has the worst potential matchup here.
THE SWEET SIXTEEN
Seeds Below 5 In the Sweet 16
| Year | Number | Seeds |
| 2008 | 4 | 7, 10, 12, 12 |
| 2007 | 2 | 6, 7 |
| 2006 | 5 | 6,7,7,11,13 |
| 2005 | 6 | 6,6,6,7,10,12 |
| 2004 | 5 | 6,7,8,9,10 |
| 2003 | 4 | 6,7,10,12 |
| 2002 | 5 | 6,8,10,11,12 |
| 2001 | 6 | 5,6,7,10,11,12 |
| 2000 | 8 | 6,6,6,7,8,8,10,10 |
| 1999 | 7 | 6,6,10,10,10,12,13 |
| 1998 | 5 | 6,6,8,10,13 |
| 1997 | 6 | 6,6,6,10,10,14 |
| 1996 | 3 | 6,8,12 |
| 1995 | 3 | 6,6,6 |
| 1994 | 4 | 6,9,10,12 |
| 1993 | 5 | 6,6,7,7,12 |
| 1992 | 5 | 6,6,7,9,12 |
| 1991 | 3 | 10,11,12 |
Look at your brackets and count up the number of seeds below #5 seeds that you have in the Sweet Sixteen. 2007 was extremely chalky with top seeds advancing, and only 2 seeds below 5 made it to the 2nd weekend. In 17 of the last 18 years this number has been between 3 and 8, so ideally you would want to be in this range, but if you have 2 or 9 then I wouldn't worry too much. I also have listed the breakdown of the seeds that advanced each year in addition to the number of teams that made it this far.
The main trend to notice in this set of data is how well the 6 seeds do, as well as the winner of the 7v10 game {more on that in the next section though}. Historically 6 seeds have had success in the 2nd round against the winner of the 3v14 game, which by and large boils down to the fact that 6 seeds often upset 3 seeds in the 2nd round. In fact, every single year since 1991 at least one 6 seed makes it to the Sweet Sixteen, and often more than one do- the vast majority of their 2nd round wins come over 3 seeds. If I didn't have any 6 seeds in the Sweet Sixteen I would strongly consider going back and picking at least one of them to make it to the second weekend. The trick, of course, is picking the right one...
Bottom line at this point you don't want your bracket to be too chalky {you have all the top seeds advancing}, nor do you want it to be such an upset-o-rama that it is way outside the norm.
Double Digit Seeds In The Sweet 16
| Year | Number | Seeds |
| 2008 | 3 | 10, 12, 12 |
| 2007 | 0 | n/a |
| 2006 | 2 | 11, 13 |
| 2005 | 2 | 10,12 |
| 2004 | 1 | 10 |
| 2003 | 2 | 10,12 |
| 2002 | 3 | 10,11,12 |
| 2001 | 3 | 10,11,12 |
| 2000 | 2 | 10,10 |
| 1999 | 5 | 10,10,10,12,13 |
| 1998 | 2 | 10,13 |
| 1997 | 3 | 10,10,14 |
| 1996 | 1 | 12 |
| 1995 | 0 | n/a |
| 1994 | 2 | 10,12 |
| 1993 | 1 | 12 |
| 1992 | 1 | 12 |
| 1991 | 3 | 10,11,12 |
Look again at your Sweet 16: do you have any double digit seeds {10 seed or lower} in there? Again, 2007 was an anomaly but even including it, in 16 of the last 18 years at least 1 double digit seed has made it to the 2nd weekend.
Notice the trend here of how well the 10 seeds are represented. What does this mean? It means that if a 10 seed beats a 7 seed and matches up with a 2 seed in the 2nd round, that 2 seed should be on upset alert, because in 11 of the last 18 years at least one such 10 seed has beaten a 2 seed and gone through to the Sweet 16. For all the hype that the 12 seeds get in beating the 5 seed in the first round {the media always point out the the "classic 12 over 5 upset"}, the 10 seeds do even better than the 12 seeds in the 2nd round. Also, if you look back up at the data set before this one, and look at all of the 7 and 10 seeds, that tells you that the winner of the 7v10 game has a great shot of getting past the 2 seed and onto the Sweet Sixteen. I always pick what I think the weakest 2 seed is to lose {or if I think a 7/10 winner is especially strong, or if a 2 seed is a team that I hate and really would love to see go out}.
ELITE EIGHT
Seeds Below #3 In Elite Eight
| Year | Number | Seeds |
| 2008 | 1 | 10 |
| 2007 | 0 | n/a |
| 2006 | 2 | 4, 11 |
| 2005 | 4 | 4, 5, 6, 7 |
| 2004 | 2 | 7, 8 |
| 2003 | 1 | 7 |
| 2002 | 3 | 5, 10, 12 |
| 2001 | 2 | 6, 11 |
| 2000 | 5 | 5, 6, 7, 8, 8 |
| 1999 | 3 | 4, 6, 10 |
| 1998 | 1 | 8 |
| 1997 | 2 | 6, 10 |
| 1996 | 2 | 4, 5 |
| 1995 | 2 | 4, 4 |
| 1994 | 1 | 9 |
| 1993 | 1 | 7 |
| 1992 | 3 | 4, 6, 6 |
| 1991 | 2 | 4, 10 |
Many beginners get to this point and have all #1 and #2 seeds. This is starting to sound like a broken record, but 2007 was an anomaly as it was the only time in the last 18 years that no team below a 3 seed made the Elite 8. Check your bracket for the number of teams seeded 4 or below in your final eight. You probably should have at least one, and if the data is an accurate predictor, not more than 5. Personally, I would be comfortable with between 1-3.
FINAL FOUR
Seeds Below #2 In Final Four
| Year | Number | Seeds |
| 2008 | 0 | n/a |
| 2007 | 0 | n/a |
| 2006 | 3 | 3, 4, 11 |
| 2005 | 2 | 4, 5 |
| 2004 | 1 | 3 |
| 2003 | 2 | 3, 3 |
| 2002 | 1 | 5 |
| 2001 | 1 | 3 |
| 2000 | 3 | 5, 5, 8 |
| 1999 | 1 | 4 |
| 1998 | 2 | 3, 3 |
| 1997 | 1 | 4 |
| 1996 | 2 | 4, 5 |
| 1995 | 1 | 4 |
| 1994 | 1 | 3 |
| 1993 | 0 | n/a |
| 1992 | 2 | 4, 6 |
| 1991 | 1 | 3 |
The last two years were rare, but it's too early to decide if this is a new trend or a blip in the traditional data, which shows that in 15 of the last 18 years at least one of the Final Four participants has been lower than a 2 seed. Also in 3 of the last 6 years at least 2 of the spots have gone to 3 seeds or lower. I would just make sure that you didn't have all four slots being 3 seeds or worse.
The Seeds Of The Final Four Participants
| Year | Seeds | Sum of Seed #s |
| 2008 | 1, 1, 1, 1 | 4 |
| 2007 | 1, 1, 2, 2 | 6 |
| 2006 | 2, 3, 4, 11 | 20 |
| 2005 | 1, 1, 4, 5 | 11 |
| 2004 | 1, 2, 2, 3 | 8 |
| 2003 | 1, 2, 3, 3 | 9 |
| 2002 | 1, 1, 2, 5 | 9 |
| 2001 | 1, 1, 2, 3 | 7 |
| 2000 | 1, 1, 5, 8 | 15 |
| 1999 | 1, 1, 1, 4 | 7 |
| 1998 | 1, 2, 3, 3 | 9 |
| 1997 | 1, 1, 1, 4 | 7 |
| 1996 | 1, 1, 4, 5 | 11 |
| 1995 | 1, 2, 2, 4 | 9 |
| 1994 | 1, 2, 2, 3 | 8 |
| 1993 | 1, 1, 1, 2 | 5 |
| 1992 | 1, 2, 4, 6 | 13 |
| 1991 | 1, 1, 2, 3 | 7 |
Last year I wrote: "If you have all four of the #1 seeds in your Final Four, then you are brave, for it has never happened."
Well, now it's happened. On the other hand, 2006 was the first time ever that none of the #1 seeds made it, so you never know.
I have seen the final four seeds wonked thusly: add up the seed #s of your final four members. In 15 of the last 18 years the number would be between 6 and 13, with wacky year 2000 having a high number of 15 and 2006's wackiness being an extreme outlier with at total of 20.
THE CHAMPIONSHIP GAME
Seeds Of The Championship Game Participants
| Year | Seeds |
| 2008 | 1, 1 |
| 2007 | 1, 1 |
| 2006 | 2, 3 |
| 2005 | 1, 1 |
| 2004 | 2, 3 |
| 2003 | 2, 3 |
| 2002 | 1, 5 |
| 2001 | 1, 2 |
| 2000 | 1, 5 |
| 1999 | 1, 1 |
| 1998 | 2, 3 |
| 1997 | 1, 4 |
| 1996 | 1, 4 |
| 1995 | 1, 2 |
| 1994 | 1, 2 |
| 1993 | 1, 1 |
| 1992 | 1, 6 |
| 1991 | 2, 3 |
Basically, the data says that you should have at least one #1 or #2 seed in the title game. If you have a 4 seed against a 6 seed here, then I applaud you for your moxie but the numbers say you won't win your office pool. In fact, then numbers say anything 3 v 3 or lower will not happen even though that sounds pretty feasible.
Seed Of The NCAA Champion
| Year | Seed |
| 2008 | 1 |
| 2007 | 1 |
| 2006 | 3 |
| 2005 | 1 |
| 2004 | 2 |
| 2003 | 3 |
| 2002 | 1 |
| 2001 | 1 |
| 2000 | 1 |
| 1999 | 1 |
| 1998 | 2 |
| 1997 | 4 |
| 1996 | 1 |
| 1995 | 1 |
| 1994 | 1 |
| 1993 | 1 |
| 1992 | 1 |
| 1991 | 2 |
The outlier here is one of my favorite teams ever, the 1997 Arizona Wildcats, who amazingly beat three different #1 seeds en route to their championship, making them the only team to ever accomplish that feat and establishing a record that can only be equaled but never surpassed. Every other year the champion has been a 1, 2, or 3 seed, with a 1 seed winning it all in 12 of the last 18 years.
So there it is, by the numbers. Again, I am not saying to fill out your brackets to meet these requirements, but to fill out your brackets and then cross check them against this data, which should not be viewed as requirements but as a guideline or baseline or whatever you like.
I like this information because I find that it helps to know basically the number of upsets that likely will happen in each round. The trick, of course, is choosing where to pick your upsets and where to have the favorites advance. That, my friends, is what separates the office pool contributors from the office pool collectors.
Happy Brackets and best of luck. Unless you have Dook winning the national title that is - then I hope that you fail miserably.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Cocktail Party 1, Athens-Clarke County School System Nil
As someone who gets his rocks off when countries literally shut down for World Cup soccer matches, or when Trinidad & Tobago declared a national holiday the day after simply qualifying for the 2006 World Cup, or that all of the schools in Louisville, KY are closed the day before the Kentucky Derby every year, I am beyond amused by this:
First reaction: HOLY SHIT that means that damn near 70 teachers in ACC call in sick on any given Friday throughout the school year? {insert joke about Georgia public education here}.
I remember when we were in college the one of the main factors for determining if any professor was to be placed in the COOL or TOOL category was whether they canceled class on the Friday before the Cocktail party or if they made a big stink about attendance that day being mandatory, as we made the road trip every year with thousands of other students and therefor weren't going to be there either way.
Georgia fans will love this bit of news. And Georgia Tech fans will too.
Tired of struggling to find enough teachers to staff its classrooms on the Friday before the annual Georgia-Florida football game, the Clarke County (Ga.) School District -- which includes Athens, home of the University of Georgia -- decided to cancel school altogether.
According to area media reports, 137 teachers last year called in sick the day before the big game, and the district was able to find only 113 substitutes. School administrators studied the absences over the years and found a pattern -- almost twice as many teachers call in sick the Friday before the annual game in Jacksonville, Fla., about 360 miles away, than on an average school day.
So the district decided to call off school the Friday before the game. And Clarke County is not alone; the schools in nearby Madison and Oglethorpe counties also are taking the day off.
According to area media reports, 137 teachers last year called in sick the day before the big game, and the district was able to find only 113 substitutes. School administrators studied the absences over the years and found a pattern -- almost twice as many teachers call in sick the Friday before the annual game in Jacksonville, Fla., about 360 miles away, than on an average school day.
So the district decided to call off school the Friday before the game. And Clarke County is not alone; the schools in nearby Madison and Oglethorpe counties also are taking the day off.
First reaction: HOLY SHIT that means that damn near 70 teachers in ACC call in sick on any given Friday throughout the school year? {insert joke about Georgia public education here}.
I remember when we were in college the one of the main factors for determining if any professor was to be placed in the COOL or TOOL category was whether they canceled class on the Friday before the Cocktail party or if they made a big stink about attendance that day being mandatory, as we made the road trip every year with thousands of other students and therefor weren't going to be there either way.
Georgia fans will love this bit of news. And Georgia Tech fans will too.
Feel Good Friday: Gator Hater Edition
Tomorrow is the World's Largest Cocktail Party 2008. As such, it's time to go all Big Tymers and everybody get your hate on, everybody everybody get your hate on, what?
1 Year Ago
"Excuse me, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
Is anybody watching this?
HELP!!! HELP!!! HELP!!!
Are you kidding?
What have I done?
Get away from me man
Get off of me!!!
What did I do???!?
What did I do???!?
What did I do???!?
What did I do???!?
I'm just laying here on my back!
Somebody help me!!!
13 carries, -15 yards rushing.
Sacked 5x all year going into game, sacked 6x by UGA.
*All kidding at Tebow's expense aside, this was one of the most fucked up things I have ever seen happen in America, and I do not condone it being done to any citizen unless that citizen is Dick Cheney.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Argentina Won. It Was Hot. And Anticlimatic.
might as well tie off this knot from the previous post...
2008 Olympic Men's Final
Argentina 1-0 Nigeria.
The Olympic final never lived up to its epic potential, although that was down to the organizers rather than the teams. The Beijing organizers really wanted to have the final in "The Birdsnest", even though each & every one of the other matches of the tournament were played in other stadia. The only time they could squeeze it in between all of the track & field events was at noon local time, and the temperature on the field was pushing 114 degrees. This of course after every other match in the whole tournament was played at night in the relatively cooler temperatures. Dumbasses.
It was so unbelievably hot, that for the first time in history, FIFA took official timeouts halfway through each of the halves so that the players could rest & drink liquids. Crazy. As you can imagine, this took quite a bit away from the game. Add to that a temporary pitch which was laid just for this game in the infield track- and which was a bit dodgy- and the game was pretty damn disappointing.
If it was a fight you might be able to say that Nigeria just shaded it on points, especially in the first half. But it wasn't a fight, and Argentina scored a goal thanks to 1) a great through pass by Messi and 2) an absolutely inexplicable fuckup by the Nigerian goalkeeper where he came all the way out of his goal, stranded himself in no man's land, and allowed Di Maria to easily chip it over his head into the goal. It was a good finish, but never would have been possible without the keeper's moment of madness.
So that was that. It was especially foolish of the organizers to play the match in the noonday sun after the series of collapsing deaths in soccer in 2007; fortunately no one collapsed.
Argentina can basically now claim to be a youth soccer dynasty. In just the last 4 years they have won back to back Olympic {under 23} Gold Medals in 2004 & 2008, as well as back to back FIFA Under 20 World Cups in 2005 & 2007. At this point, with the incredible young talent they have, in addition to the ridiculous talent in their senior squad, they are in my mind the clear favorites to lift the 2010 World Cup.
2008 Olympic Men's Final
Argentina 1-0 Nigeria.
The Olympic final never lived up to its epic potential, although that was down to the organizers rather than the teams. The Beijing organizers really wanted to have the final in "The Birdsnest", even though each & every one of the other matches of the tournament were played in other stadia. The only time they could squeeze it in between all of the track & field events was at noon local time, and the temperature on the field was pushing 114 degrees. This of course after every other match in the whole tournament was played at night in the relatively cooler temperatures. Dumbasses.
It was so unbelievably hot, that for the first time in history, FIFA took official timeouts halfway through each of the halves so that the players could rest & drink liquids. Crazy. As you can imagine, this took quite a bit away from the game. Add to that a temporary pitch which was laid just for this game in the infield track- and which was a bit dodgy- and the game was pretty damn disappointing.
If it was a fight you might be able to say that Nigeria just shaded it on points, especially in the first half. But it wasn't a fight, and Argentina scored a goal thanks to 1) a great through pass by Messi and 2) an absolutely inexplicable fuckup by the Nigerian goalkeeper where he came all the way out of his goal, stranded himself in no man's land, and allowed Di Maria to easily chip it over his head into the goal. It was a good finish, but never would have been possible without the keeper's moment of madness.
So that was that. It was especially foolish of the organizers to play the match in the noonday sun after the series of collapsing deaths in soccer in 2007; fortunately no one collapsed.
Argentina can basically now claim to be a youth soccer dynasty. In just the last 4 years they have won back to back Olympic {under 23} Gold Medals in 2004 & 2008, as well as back to back FIFA Under 20 World Cups in 2005 & 2007. At this point, with the incredible young talent they have, in addition to the ridiculous talent in their senior squad, they are in my mind the clear favorites to lift the 2010 World Cup.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)