Certified Legendary Thread Race for the flag, in squiggly lines

[sproketman]

I'm no maths wizz (but I did know the bucket cost 5c) so I'm happy to be corrected, but I don't think you're looking for a Markov chain because I think that relies on a standard transition matrix, this scenario doesn't have that - the transition probabilities vary from round to round.

Like I've said before - the biggest value in the Squiggle for me is data visualisation.

They only change when the results come in for each round. As it stands now, the probabilities for each game from round 23 to the end of the season are forecast by the Squiggle.

Right now, the flagpole forecasts Hawthorn as streets ahead of any other club, yet based on the probabilities for the Hawks against each opponent they might likely face, their chance of winning the flag would not be as great as the flagpole suggests. They're still the best in it, they aren't that far ahead of the Swans or West Coast.

If Sydney & Hawthorn win, then it's likely Eagles vs Crows out west, which Eagles should win, and Freo hosting Richmond, which they should win as well. Otherwise if Sydney and West Coast win, then there's a PF showdown and Sydney wouldn't be favourites against Hawthorn.

By the model, Sydney are rated as a two goal lesser side than Hawthorn on the same territory (vs Freo at Subi). Put Sydney vs Hawthorn in Sydney, and the model likely rates that game 50/50, due to the two goal gain from home ground advantage.

 

[sproketman]

So they need to do something that's been done once.

I also tyinl the competition is more even this year than 05.

Big ask!

Brisbane did it in 2003.

vs Collingwood @ MCG QF
vs Adelaide @ Gabba SF
vs Sydney @ Stadium Australia PF
vs Collingwood @ MCG GF

That begs the question: are Hawthorn like 2003 Brisbane? Not in great form, but old hands who can perform in finals?

The Squiggle suggests they are more like 2004 Brisbane, in scintillating form.

 

[Paracleet]

It looks like that at the moment Freo are not the lowest ever placed minor premier in squiggle terms, that honour going to Port in 2003. When they get humped by, ironically, Port this weekend with half the team on an RDO, how much will they have to loose by to add this award their inaugural McClelland?

 

[eaglespremiers]

It looks like that at the moment Freo are not the lowest ever placed minor premier in squiggle terms, that honour going to Port in 2003. When they get humped by, ironically, Port this weekend with half the team on an RDO, how much will they have to loose by to add this award their inaugural McClelland?

 

[WWSD]

Brisbane did it in 2003.

vs Collingwood @ MCG QF
vs Adelaide @ Gabba SF
vs Sydney @ Stadium Australia PF
vs Collingwood @ MCG GF

That begs the question: are Hawthorn like 2003 Brisbane? Not in great form, but old hands who can perform in finals?

The Squiggle suggests they are more like 2004 Brisbane, in scintillating form.

Hawthorn 2015 vs Brisbane 2003

Percentage
Brisbane: 121.94%
Hawthorn: 156.77%

Win-Loss record
Brisbane: 17-8-1
Hawthorn: 15-6*

Average winning margin
Brisbane: 39.2 points
Hawthorn: 60.7 points

Average losing margin
Brisbane: 16.7 points
Hawthorn: 10.7 points

Average points for
Brisbane: 104 (ranked 2 in 2003)
Hawthorn: 111.38 (ranked 1 in 2015)

Average points against
Brisbane: 83.46 (ranked 5 for points conceded in 2003)
Hawthorn: 71.05 (ranked 2 for points conceded in 2015)

Average goals
Brisbane: 15.2
Hawthorn: 16.6

 

[Paracleet]

I am literally incandescent with rage at my humiliation.

 

[sproketman]

Hawthorn 2015 vs Brisbane 2003

Percentage
Brisbane: 121.94%
Hawthorn: 156.77%

Win-Loss record
Brisbane: 17-8-1
Hawthorn: 15-6*

Average winning margin
Brisbane: 39.2 points
Hawthorn: 60.7 points

Average losing margin
Brisbane: 16.7 points
Hawthorn: 10.7 points

Average points for
Brisbane: 104 (ranked 2 in 2003)
Hawthorn: 111.38 (ranked 1 in 2015)

Average points against
Brisbane: 83.46 (ranked 5 for points conceded in 2003)
Hawthorn: 71.05 (ranked 2 for points conceded in 2015)

Average goals
Brisbane: 15.2
Hawthorn: 16.6

You're going in as third, having lost games you should win, with the potential to travel twice. It's a difficult ask - as stated before, winning from third is rare, and winning while travelling twice in finals, under the current system, has only been done twice. Your percentage etc don't matter: you are starting at a disadvantage in your finals draw.

 

[WWSD]

You're going in as third, having lost games you should win, with the potential to travel twice. It's a difficult ask - as stated before, winning from third is rare, and winning while travelling twice in finals, under the current system, has only been done twice. Your percentage etc don't matter: you are starting at a disadvantage in your finals draw.

Yes we are going to have to travel twice which will be tough. It's not mission impossible though. If we win the Qualifying Final we are in the box seat for a Grand Final spot, lose the Qualifying Final however it's essentially game over and a Derby Grand Final beckons.

 

[Final Siren]

Is my, and many others, feeling that this is an unusually even year true by the squiggle? Just looking at the squiggle/flagpole it doesn't seem so even. But is sure feels that way week to week.

Probably most years feel even until someone wins the flag... then it feels inevitable.

But this year, assuming Sydney make Top 4, 5th-8th are unusually strong and 1st is shockingly weak*. The two standout teams* have major question marks in that West Coast is in the finals for the first time since 2012 and Hawthorn will miss Top 2.

So we have a minor premier who struggles to beat mid-tier teams* but only needs to host two games in Perth to make the Grand Final, a 2nd-placed team that everyone has spent the entire season waiting to see fall over, a 3rd-placed powerhouse* that might have peaked too early and needs to criss-cross the country to claim their third flag in a row, and a 4th-placed team that looks like a carbon copy of last year, all of which have lost games to the sides slotting into 5th-8th, who look hungry and capable of upsets.

So, yeah, it's a good year.

* On exposed form.

 

[Dr Tigris]

Probably most years feel even until someone wins the flag... then it feels inevitable.

But this year, assuming Sydney make Top 4, 5th-8th are unusually strong and 1st is shockingly weak*. The two standout teams* have major question marks in that West Coast is in the finals for the first time since 2012 and Hawthorn will miss Top 2.

So we have a minor premier who struggles to beat mid-tier teams* but only needs to host two games in Perth to make the Grand Final, a 2nd-placed team that everyone has spent the entire season waiting to see fall over, a 3rd-placed powerhouse* that might have peaked too early and needs to criss-cross the country to claim their third flag in a row, and a 4th-placed team that looks like a carbon copy of last year, all of which have lost games to the sides slotting into 5th-8th, who look hungry and capable of upsets.

So, yeah, it's a good year.

* On exposed form.

Thanks mate. Very much how I feel. The squiggle and flagpole look fairly normal. Except when you look at the ladder and 'form'. Strange year. I feel that the 5-8 teams could do some damage this year. But then wouldn't be surprised if top 4 dominated. Although I really do feel some 5-8 teams could go all the way. Especially the tigers and crows. It would be amazing if they did - someone will eventually.

 

[Final Siren]

Thanks mate. Very much how I feel. The squiggle and flagpole look fairly normal. Except when you look at the ladder and 'form'. Strange year. I feel that the 5-8 teams could do some damage this year. But then wouldn't be surprised if top 4 dominated. Although I really do feel some 5-8 teams could go all the way. Especially the tigers and crows. It would be amazing if they did - someone will eventually.

It's definitely a great year for a lower team to reach the Grand Final. I dunno about winning the whole thing, but I can see them sneaking through a prelim.

 

[Hawkk]

You're going in as third, having lost games you should win, with the potential to travel twice. It's a difficult ask - as stated before, winning from third is rare, and winning while travelling twice in finals, under the current system, has only been done twice. Your percentage etc don't matter: you are starting at a disadvantage in your finals draw.

Its not that rare under the current system.

Teams that have won the flag from 3rd include...

2003 - Brisbane Lions
2005 - Sydney Swans
2012 - Sydney Swans

But of course if you extend the assessment to identify teams that have made the GF from 3rd / 4th under the current configuration...

2000 - Melbourne (14-8, 118.4% 3rd) belted by Essendon 135-75 in the GF (20-1, 159.1% 1st)
2002 - Collingwood (13-9, 109.7% 4th) lost to Brisbane Lions 75-66 in the GF (17-5, 136.7% 2nd)
2003 - Brisbane Lions (14-1-7, 121.9% 3rd) belted Collingwood 134-84 in the GF (15-7, 121.6% 2nd)
2005 - Sydney Swans (15-7, 116.4% 3rd) defeated West Coast 56-53 in the GF (17-5, 124.0% 2nd)
2006 - Sydney Swans (14-8, 128.7% 4th) defeated by West Coast 85-84 in the GF (17-5, 120.4% 1st)
2010 - St Kilda (15-1-6, 121.6% 3rd) drew with Collingwood 68-68 but lost the replay 108-52 (17-1-4, 141.7% 1st)
2012 - Sydney Swans (16-6, 140.6% 3rd) defeated Hawthorn 91-81 in the GF (17-5, 154.6% 1st)
2013 - Fremantle (16-1-5, 134.1% 3rd) lost to Hawthorn 77-62 in the GF (19-3, 135.7% 1st)

Since 2000 more than half of the GF's have featured 3rd or 4th in the decider.

For Hawthorn the key is playing games at the MCG...

Since ANZAC Day, 2010 Hawthorn has a 55-15 record at the MCG (9 losses against Geelong). How does this compare against the fellow contenders?

Hawthorn 55-15 (78%)
Fremantle 6-8 (42.8%)
Sydney 7-1-11 (36.8%)
West Coast 4-9 (30.7%)

If Hawthorn play Fremantle, Sydney or West Coast at the MCG the game could be up.

Hawthorn only has to win one of two interstate finals to get back on the MCG...if they win their first final they will have the inside running to win the flag

 

[sproketman]

But of course if you extend the assessment to identify teams that have made the GF from 3rd / 4th under the current configuration...

But if you do, you have to also account for Sydney in fourth place. Who have the easiest opponent of the top four, potentially the easiest opponent of the entire top eight (going by Squiggle form), in the first round of finals.

Yet the flagpole rates them as a worse chance than Adelaide.

Sydney's path to the preliminary finals, and potentially grand final, is the easiest of all clubs, yet it is rated as the fourth most likely to win the flag.

Yes, Hawthorn are in the box seat, because of all possible permutations, there are only two games they likely wouldn't be favourites (West Coast in Perth, Sydney in Sydney), whereas all their rivals have more match ups they would be likely to lose. But it's not that great a distance as the flagpole suggests.

I understand that the purpose of the flagpole is not to care about who is third or fourth ranked for the flag, it is meant to pick winners. Adelaide being rated as better than Sydney is simply a noisy artifact of the model if Hawthorn win the premiership.

But even as a winner-takes-all model it isn't very successful. I imagine it was unlikely that flagpole picked Sydney 2005, Hawthorn 2008, Collingwood 2010, Geelong 2011 (before round 23), and Sydney 2012 as the clear premiership favourites in the latter rounds of those seasons. And I'm not sure where it rated Geelong against St Kilda in 2009 at round 22.

So at predicting the ultimate winner, it has no better than 50% success rate over the past decade. That's not good enough to ignore the noise of 'Port is closer to premiership than Fremantle' or 'Adelaide is the third most likely team to win it'.

 

[cryptor]

Flagpole makes a lot of sense if you separate those rankings from finals match ups.

Try to pretend that those are the chances of each team winning the flag if they were to start finals in the same ladder position with unspecified finals opponents.

Like Final Siren has said several times you need to take into account the other variables like likely finals paths, etc. yourself because it doesn't due to it unlikely to be able to do it as well as your average punter could intuitively.

These are visualization tools that aid your own footy knowledge - not replacing it.

It's like complaining your hammer doesn't bang nails in well but all you're doing is passively watching it sit on the table. A hammer is only useful if you use it as intended.

 

[richoatthedisco]

Can't believe I just discovered this. Awesome work, Final Siren.

If Hawthorn play Fremantle, Sydney or West Coast at the MCG the game could be up.

If Hawthorn play Richmond at the MCG, the game could be up as well.

 

[sproketman]

Flagpole makes a lot of sense if you separate those rankings from finals match ups.

Try to pretend that those are the chances of each team winning the flag if they were to start finals in the same ladder position with unspecified finals opponents.

Like Final Siren has said several times you need to take into account the other variables like likely finals paths, etc. yourself because it doesn't due to it unlikely to be able to do it as well as your average punter could intuitively.

These are visualization tools that aid your own footy knowledge - not replacing it.

It's like complaining your hammer doesn't bang nails in well but all you're doing is passively watching it sit on the table. A hammer is only useful if you use it as intended.

What if the hammer has two claws and no head?

 

[Hawkk]

Can't believe I just discovered this. Awesome work, Final Siren.


If Hawthorn play Richmond at the MCG, the game could be up as well.

Just need to win the first final and hope Richmond stay away from th MCG

 

[cryptor]

What if the hammer has two claws and no head?

Then it's not a hammer

 

[sproketman]

Then it's not a hammer

Just because something looks like a tool, doesn't mean it has a purpose.

The visualization of the flagpole is misleading and potentially incorrect (it's success rate isn't great before finals). Given it says it is in 'beta' I think it's open to criticism.

 

[Hawkk]

But if you do, you have to also account for Sydney in fourth place. Who have the easiest opponent of the top four, potentially the easiest opponent of the entire top eight (going by Squiggle form), in the first round of finals.

Yet the flagpole rates them as a worse chance than Adelaide.

Sydney's path to the preliminary finals, and potentially grand final, is the easiest of all clubs, yet it is rated as the fourth most likely to win the flag.

Yes, Hawthorn are in the box seat, because of all possible permutations, there are only two games they likely wouldn't be favourites (West Coast in Perth, Sydney in Sydney), whereas all their rivals have more match ups they would be likely to lose. But it's not that great a distance as the flagpole suggests.

I understand that the purpose of the flagpole is not to care about who is third or fourth ranked for the flag, it is meant to pick winners. Adelaide being rated as better than Sydney is simply a noisy artifact of the model if Hawthorn win the premiership.

But even as a winner-takes-all model it isn't very successful. I imagine it was unlikely that flagpole picked Sydney 2005, Hawthorn 2008, Collingwood 2010, Geelong 2011 (before round 23), and Sydney 2012 as the clear premiership favourites in the latter rounds of those seasons. And I'm not sure where it rated Geelong against St Kilda in 2009 at round 22.

So at predicting the ultimate winner, it has no better than 50% success rate over the past decade. That's not good enough to ignore the noise of 'Port is closer to premiership than Fremantle' or 'Adelaide is the third most likely team to win it'.

Agreed although my concerns for Sydney centre on their record against the top 4 and 8...

Fremantle is 2-2 against the top 4, 6-4 against the top 8
West Coast is 2-2 against the top 4, 4-6 against the top 8
Hawthorn is 3-1 against the top 4, 6-2 against the top 8
Sydney is 1-3 against the top 4, 3-5 against the top 8
Richmond is 2-2 against the top 4, 2-5 against the top 8
W Bulldogs are 2-3 against the top 4, 5-3 against the top 8
Adelaide is 1-4 against the top 4, 3-5 against the top 8
North Melbourne is 2-2 against the top 4, 3-5 against the top 8

The top 8 ladder looks something like this...

1. Hawthorn 6-2 (3-1 v top 4)
2. Fremantle 6-4 (2-2 v top 4)
3. W Bulldogs 5-3 (2-3 v top 4)
4. West Coast 4-6 (2-2 v top 4)
5. North Melbourne 3-5 (2-2 v top 4)
6. Sydney 3-5 (1-3 v top 4)
7. Adelaide 3-5 (1-4 v top 4)
8. Richmond 2-5 (2-2 v top 4)

If you look at the build up to finals like this it really does debunk a number of myths. Namely that Fremantle is road kill and Richmond is the dark horse for the premiership

I guess the squiggle is a tool that helps supplement existing knowledge...

 

[cryptor]

Just because something looks like a tool, doesn't mean it has a purpose.

 

[sproketman]

Agreed although my concerns for Sydney centre on their record against the top 4 and 8...

I don't put much stock in a who-beat-who ladder before finals. Wasn't 2008 the year Hawthorn had lost to all of the top four during the regular season and then beat them all in finals?

In Sydney's case, two of their losses to top four opponents were in Perth, one of them when Freo was in their best form of the season. Give Sydney a home ground advantage in the prelims and they look a lot stronger, and they can get there by beating the weakest finalist in an away trip they didn't find too hard the last time.

Whoever wins out of West Coast and Hawthorn is truly in the box seat for a grand final berth, and loser of that still has a reasonable path for making it anyway. That's where the flagpole is correct, but I think the discounting of Sydney is too strong.

 

[Tenilius]

Agreed although my concerns for Sydney centre on their record against the top 4 and 8...

Fremantle is 2-2 against the top 4, 6-4 against the top 8
West Coast is 2-2 against the top 4, 4-6 against the top 8
Hawthorn is 3-1 against the top 4, 6-2 against the top 8
Sydney is 1-3 against the top 4, 3-5 against the top 8
Richmond is 2-2 against the top 4, 2-5 against the top 8
W Bulldogs are 2-3 against the top 4, 5-3 against the top 8
Adelaide is 1-4 against the top 4, 3-5 against the top 8
North Melbourne is 2-2 against the top 4, 3-5 against the top 8

The top 8 ladder looks something like this...

1. Hawthorn 6-2 (3-1 v top 4)
2. Fremantle 6-4 (2-2 v top 4)
3. W Bulldogs 5-3 (2-3 v top 4)
4. West Coast 4-6 (2-2 v top 4)
5. North Melbourne 3-5 (2-2 v top 4)
6. Sydney 3-5 (1-3 v top 4)
7. Adelaide 3-5 (1-4 v top 4)
8. Richmond 2-5 (2-2 v top 4)

If you look at the build up to finals like this it really does debunk a number of myths. Namely that Fremantle is road kill and Richmond is the dark horse for the premiership

I guess the squiggle is a tool that helps supplement existing knowledge...

Actually Richmond are 3-2 v top 4 (win away v Freo and Sydney, win "home" v Hawthorn and losses home to WCE and Freo) which changes your table considerably.

 

[Hawkk]

Actually Richmond are 3-2 v top 4 (win away v Freo and Sydney, win "home" v Hawthorn and losses home to WCE and Freo) which changes your table considerably.

I stand corrected

1. Hawthorn 6-2 (3-1 v top 4)
2. Fremantle 6-4 (2-2 v top 4)
3. W Bulldogs 5-3 (2-3 v top 4)
4. West Coast 4-6 (2-2 v top 4)
5. Richmond 3-5 (3-2 v top 4)
6. North Melbourne 3-5 (2-2 v top 4)
7. Sydney 3-5 (1-3 v top 4)
8. Adelaide 3-5 (1-4 v top 4)

 

[Hawkk]

I don't put much stock in a who-beat-who ladder before finals. Wasn't 2008 the year Hawthorn had lost to all of the top four during the regular season and then beat them all in finals?

In Sydney's case, two of their losses to top four opponents were in Perth, one of them when Freo was in their best form of the season. Give Sydney a home ground advantage in the prelims and they look a lot stronger, and they can get there by beating the weakest finalist in an away trip they didn't find too hard the last time.

Whoever wins out of West Coast and Hawthorn is truly in the box seat for a grand final berth, and loser of that still has a reasonable path for making it anyway. That's where the flagpole is correct, but I think the discounting of Sydney is too strong.

Hawthorn was 0-3 against the top 4 in 2008 and 5-5 against the top 8