The Fixture Difficulty is The Most Overrated Variable in Ladder Predictions

[Top_4_Tiger]

Something's I've noticed.

Opinions often sway wildly, say from top 4 because of an easy fixture to missing the 8 because of a hard fixture. I believe this attitude has been amplified in recent years due to the genuine easiness some sides have had in playing Gold Coast / GWS in their formative years.

In reality, with only 5 double-up games and a slightly weighted top 6 / middle 6 / bottom 6 system, at most one club can usually only have an advantage of TWO POSSIBLE WINS over another club.

And if they're half decent, they'll be 50/50 in those tougher games anyway, meaning statistically they should go close to winning one... Meaning they're probably closer to at a -1 disadvantage (earned through finishing higher on the ladder).

A club aiming for 16-17 wins gets a hard draw... Yet many people use that information as justification for holding the view that they're likely to miss the 8 in place of a 12th placed club on 9 wins, for example. The fixture can't account for 5-8 wins. The sway is too extreme. Typically, the difference is likely to be 1 win, or 2 wins at most.

The fixture doesn't define a club's fortunes for the upcoming season. It's time to relegate this attitude to the 2011-2013 period where it did have a 3 game advantage in some cases.

This thread was inspired by the Port thread, in which people had them missing the 8 mostly for this weak, weak, reason. If they're the 5th best team for 2014, then a hard fixture can only see them drop to about 6th.

 

[Jay-Z]

Agree. The fixture is largely irrelevant. Especially because what we see now as an "easy draw" may change significantly depending on how teams improve / fall away. For example, this time last year people would have been treating 2 games vs Port as equivalent to 2 games vs GWS when assessing the 'ease' of team's fixtures which based on the actual results of 2013 was obviously way off.

 

[vonn]

I think the fixture is irrelevant if you're a Top 4 team which is why I believe that eventually, deep in finals the ''correct'' ladder position is sorted and the premiers are always nearly spot on.

However, I believe if you're a 5-10 side, the fixture plays a huge part in determining your placing.

 

[WWSD]

We've copped the hardest draw three years in a row.

lol

 

[Ironmonger]

I think it's a little more complicated. One of the things with Port this year, to cite an example, is that winning became a habit for a team that had gotten used to losing under Primus. There was a trifecta of games late in the season where they narrowly beat St Kilda, Brisbane and Adelaide, where the results could've gone against them if they hadn't had the confidence from winning games earlier in the season.

It's not very scientific, and I can't fault the OP's logic, but I reckon there's more to it than a couple of games a year.

 

[MotleyLemon]

We've copped the hardest draw three years in a row.

lol

No, we have.

You don't have to play Hawthorn twice.

 

[Harris Specter]

No, we have.

You don't have to play Hawthorn twice.

Luckily, you play Brisbane twice too!

 

[MotleyLemon]

Luckily, you play Brisbane twice too!

Be lucky to split those games...

 

[Franc de Borges]

The best teams will always be near the top and the worst near the bottom, and while the influence of the fixture may be overstated it certainly has the potential to turn a mediocre side into a finalist and a decent team into a top four candidate.

Often the true ease or difficulty of a fixture is only revealed once the season is in full swing and teams are shown to have either been over or underrated based on their previous form, and while the league cannot plan for this eventuality, you can't tell me that those variables don't have some influence in a compromised draw.

 

[Papa G]

People do gone on about Port's easy draw last year, but the truth of the matter is we played the bottom 4 teams 5 times, as did Carlton, as did Sydney. Freo and Richmond both played the bottom 4 teams 6 times each.

 

[Franc de Borges]

People do gone on about Port's easy draw last year, but the truth of the matter is we played the bottom 4 teams 5 times, as did Carlton, as did Sydney. Freo and Richmond both played the bottom 4 teams 6 times each.

Well you have to play the bottom four at least four times if you're not in it, so this theory would support the OP's assertion that it's only a one to two game swing at best.

 

[Ketchup]

Must be why 9th beat 5th last year in the finals

 

[Top_4_Tiger]

I think it's a little more complicated. One of the things with Port this year, to cite an example, is that winning became a habit for a team that had gotten used to losing under Primus. There was a trifecta of games late in the season where they narrowly beat St Kilda, Brisbane and Adelaide, where the results could've gone against them if they hadn't had the confidence from winning games earlier in the season.

It's not very scientific, and I can't fault the OP's logic, but I reckon there's more to it than a couple of games a year.

True, the mindset of knowing you have an easy or hard fixture can affect motivation and belief.

Perhaps an easy opening month is more of a factor than the double-up teams?

 

[Furn2]

The news fixture group rules don't really even it up that much.

Eg

One top 4 team could get 1,2,3,7,8 twice

while another can get 5,6,11,12,18 twice.

I think it's more about attrition than ladder position. Getting GWS and melb twice compared to hawthorn and Geelong means 2 tough bruising games compared to basically 2 byes where you can rest players and cruise through the game.

Could be the difference in the last 10 mins of a close GF.

 

[Mervyn Beasley]

The best teams will always be near the top and the worst near the bottom, and while the influence of the fixture may be overstated it certainly has the potential to turn a mediocre side into a finalist and a decent team into a top four candidate.

Often the true ease or difficulty of a fixture is only revealed once the season is in full swing and teams are shown to have either been over or underrated based on their previous form, and while the league cannot plan for this eventuality, you can't tell me that those variables don't have some influence in a compromised draw.

Adelaide were very near the top in 2012 - pretty much due to a kind fixture.
They werent top 4 imo in that season.

 

[Air_Chester]

I think the fixture is irrelevant if you're a Top 4 team which is why I believe that eventually, deep in finals the ''correct'' ladder position is sorted and the premiers are always nearly spot on.

However, I believe if you're a 5-10 side, the fixture plays a huge part in determining your placing.

Agreed. The only difference the draw will make is on teams fighting for a finals spot in the 6-10 bracket. Even then it's really not going to make any difference.

 

[longsuffreosupp]

Adelaide were very near the top in 2012 - pretty much due to a kind fixture.
They werent top 4 imo in that season.

Yet were a goal off a grand final berth..

 

[blue harvest]

Yet were a goal off a grand final berth..

Due to their soft draw getting them 2 home finals.

 

[Righteo]

People do gone on about Port's easy draw last year, but the truth of the matter is we played the bottom 4 teams 5 times, as did Carlton, as did Sydney. Freo and Richmond both played the bottom 4 teams 6 times each.

Yep, haven't seen our soft fixture mentioned on BF yet.

 

[Bollox]

Fixture is always inherently skewed and biased toward Melbourne teams. They effectively get an easy run to finals.

Coll and Ess for instance play 17 Home and just 5 away games for the entire season.
Carlton and Richmond are the unlucky ones having to play a grand total of 6 away games. Carlton of course get to play their FIRST NINE AT HOME..unbelievable bias, a virtual gift run on the ladder to the halfway point for their form, membership drive and finals chances.

Clubs from other states such as Sydney, Brissy, Weagles, Port must play 10 away games.

The clubs that actually want to improve want to play the top teams...the more the better. However there's simply no argument nor pretence that gets around the inherent bias toward Melbourne clubs that get consistently favored every single year right from the outset.

ALL Melbourne clubs get a massive AFL handout every year and get their road to finals greased.

 

[Franc de Borges]

Adelaide were very near the top in 2012 - pretty much due to a kind fixture.
They werent top 4 imo in that season.

I think the Crows are a finals side, but that draw elevated them into the top four, I agree.

 

[Tragic sainter]

Fixture is always inherently skewed and biased toward Melbourne teams. They effectively get an easy run to finals.

Coll and Ess for instance play 17 Home and just 5 away games for the entire season.
Carlton and Richmond are the unlucky ones having to play a grand total of 6 away games. Carlton of course get to play their FIRST NINE AT HOME..unbelievable bias, a virtual gift run on the ladder to the halfway point for their form, membership drive and finals chances.

Clubs from other states such as Sydney, Brissy, Weagles, Port must play 10 away games.

The clubs that actually want to improve want to play the top teams...the more the better. However there's simply no argument nor pretence that gets around the inherent bias toward Melbourne clubs that get consistently favored every single year right from the outset.

ALL Melbourne clubs get a massive AFL handout every year and get their road to finals greased.

You can have our fixture if we can have all your extra money and zoning concessions.

 

[skipjack]

Fixture is always inherently skewed and biased toward Melbourne teams. They effectively get an easy run to finals.

Coll and Ess for instance play 17 Home and just 5 away games for the entire season.
Carlton and Richmond are the unlucky ones having to play a grand total of 6 away games. Carlton of course get to play their FIRST NINE AT HOME..unbelievable bias, a virtual gift run on the ladder to the halfway point for their form, membership drive and finals chances.

Clubs from other states such as Sydney, Brissy, Weagles, Port must play 10 away games.

The clubs that actually want to improve want to play the top teams...the more the better. However there's simply no argument nor pretence that gets around the inherent bias toward Melbourne clubs that get consistently favored every single year right from the outset.

ALL Melbourne clubs get a massive AFL handout every year and get their road to finals greased.

The con for interstate teams is 10 games or so of travel. The massive pro though is that when they play at home they play against a team that had travelled - increasing their home ground advantage.

Its the swings and roundabouts of a national fixture.

Op makes good points but in previous years fixturing has tended to play a part in the position of those middle of the road teams.

 

[Ambrosia]

Ports draw may not have been that good over the whole season but there is no way they would have had anywhere near as good of a season if they had to play Hawthorn, Sydney, Geelong, Essendon, Richmond and Collingwood in the early rounds.

 

[Bosk]

OP's post.

When your club cops a draw as hard as what we've had to endure the past two years, THEN you will earn the right to say the fixture's difficulty is overrated.

Until then, keep your trap shut and enjoy the cushy ride Vlad has prepared for the Tigers.