Remove this Banner Ad

Certified Legendary Thread Race for the flag, in squiggly lines

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Eagle fans dont be dismayed this was the squiggle tip last year

Grand Final Preview 2014

z4N53cB.png


All year, Hawthorn have looked like the team in pole position, sitting comfortably closer to the mass of premiership cups than any other team. Even when Sydney edged ahead in terms of raw scores, Hawthorn remained in a historically fertile place, while Sydney were surrounded by white space, where teams often made finals but fell short of premierships.

The Swans' two finals performances, though, have given them a significant kick towards that cluster of cups. They're now in a place where a 2015 premiership wouldn't look out of place - it would sit closer to that main cluster than to the "outlier" premierships of 1994 and 2005. The Hawks no longer have that mantle of being the clearly best-positioned team.

The Hawks' consistency, charting in the same place all year (despite significant disruption), has also been impressive, but again it's become hard to knock the Swans on that score. After restarting their season in Round 5, they rocketed to an excellent position and held that for the second half of the year, before now kicking into a higher gear in the finals. So neither team is betraying any fragility or erratic movement that might suggest their current position is undeserved.

The Hawks are the most attacking team in the league and the Swans the best defensive team, although both are quite balanced compared to the top teams of years gone by. For example, last year we also had a Grand Final between the most attacking and defensive teams, but the Hawks' defence was weaker while the Dockers' attack was weaker.

In a way it feels anti-climactic to have these two face off, because they've been the most likely Grand Finallists for a while now. If Port had made it, it would have made for a more amazing story. But Grand Finals aren't for romance: Grand Finals are for the two best teams of the year to run through each other. And that's what we're getting.

Squiggle tip

The usual squiggle algorithm awards 12pts to the home team against an interstate opponent. This works well during the home & away season, allowing the squiggle to, for example, correctly tip the Hawks to beat Sydney in Melbourne, then lose to Freo away, then beat Geelong at home.

There are two little wrinkles with it, though. The first is about what happens when there's a difference between the nominal home team (the team with "home" status) and the geographic home team (the team in whose state the game is being played). This is one of those games: Sydney, by virtue of finishing 1st on the ladder, is the nominal home team, but Hawthorn is the geographic home team. Historically, in these situations, the nominal home team does better. It seems strange and counter-intuitive, but it's what happens.

Secondly, this algorithm is calibrated to tip home & away matches, not Grand Finals. It doesn't have a particularly good record at tipping Grand Finals.

So although the interactive squiggle predictor is saying Sydney 82 - 91 Hawthorn, this is only after awarding the Hawks' a 12-pt home advantage that there's little statistical evidence that it deserves.

My best Grand Final tipper, as discussed before, is the OFFDEF-75 algorithm. This awards no home ground advantage, and heavily weights recent matches, i.e. finals performances. It has a 9-1 (90%) record at picking Grand Final winners over the last 10 years, and 20-5 (80%) over the last 25 years.

Before last weekend, OFFDEF-75 liked Port Adelaide best, then Sydney, then the Hawks. After the Swans thrashed North Melbourne, they moved ahead of Port - despite the Roos not being considered the toughest of opponents, the final margin was a big one, enough to shift them significantly. This meant that for Port to pull ahead, they had to beat the Hawks by 4 goals, and for the Hawks to pull ahead, they had to absolutely demolish the Power.

Neither happened. A narrow win to Hawthorn left Sydney ahead, and so the OFFDEF-75 Grand Final tip is:

Sydney.png
Sydney 90 - 80 Hawthorn
Hawthorn.png

Algorithm details: For anyone interested in more nitty-gritty, here are some notable algorithms and their tips. Overall, 7 are tipping Sydney (by 6-18 pts) and 1 is tipping Hawthorn (by 9).

  1. OFFDEF-75. My best Grand Final picker. No home advantage. Heavily weights recent games. 25-year GF record: 80%. 10-year GF record: 90%. Tip: Sydney by 10.
  2. VENUE-81:13. Considers performances at the MCG. 25 years: 76%. 10 years: 80%. Sydney by 6.
  3. OFFDEF-88:5. 5-pt home advantage to the nominal home team. Some more weight to recent games. 25 years: 80%. 10 years: 70%. Sydney by 11.
  4. ISTATE-91:12: POWER:88. Heavily weights games against strong opposition. 25 years: 68%. 10 years: 80%. Sydney by 12.
  5. PILGRIM-91:12. Penalizes teams based on distance travelled between games. 25 years: 72%. 10 years: 60%. Sydney by 8.
  6. ISTATE-91:12. Core squiggle algorithm, using nominal home ground advantage. 25 years: 60%. 10 years: 50%. Sydney by 18.
  7. ISTATEV2F-91:12. Core squiggle algorithm, using geographic home ground advantage. 25 years: 56%. 10 years: 60%. Hawthorn by 9.
  8. HOMER. Tip the home team, i.e. the one that finished higher on the ladder. 25 years: 52%. 10 years: 50%. Sydney.
 
Well, it's that thing where 100% of rational experts will tip a 60/40 favourite. But that doesn't mean it's 100% likely to win.

About 90% of my algorithms are tipping the Hawks, 10% Eagles.

Curiously, one of the Eagles boosters is OFFDEF-75, which was my GF tipper last year, until the Hawks disgraced it. It isn't impressed with the Hawks' late-season form, while it loves how the Eagles' last three games involved keeping St Kilda to 30pts, Hawthorn to 64pts, and North to 55pts.

Interesting...

Last year you posted all the different scores from the different algorithms

We're a demanding lot but it would be interesting to see what margin OFF-DEF75 predicts

Is the 2015 Hawks favour antisipated to be more lopsidded than the 2014 GF was in the Swans favour?
 
Eagle fans dont be dismayed this was the squiggle tip last year
Although then you're taking heart from the fact that one of the few algorithms tipping you this year was wrong last year!

But yeah, obviously the Eagles can win. The squiggle doesn't play to its strengths in Grand Finals, it doesn't know much about the teams, and footy is footy...
 
Interesting...

Last year you posted all the different scores from the different algorithms

We're a demanding lot but it would be interesting to see what margin OFF-DEF75 predicts

Is the 2015 Hawks favour antisipated to be more lopsidded than the 2014 GF was in the Swans favour?
OFFDEF-75 says Hawthorn 71-84 West Coast.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Final Siren as Roby mentioned about premiers never getting thrashed: does this agree with the squiggle in terms of premiers not having large "backwards steps" and (possibly more interestingly) could it predict whether large relative score (60 def 40) or absolute score (120 def 90) beatings fail to happen to eventual premiers?
 
OFFDEF-75 says Hawthorn 71-84 West Coast.

Last year I think you posted the top 10 algorthyms to compare / contrast. It was facinating. But again I'm asking for a lot but delivering donuts

Although then you're taking heart from the fact that one of the few algorithms tipping you this year was wrong last year!

But yeah, obviously the Eagles can win. The squiggle doesn't play to its strengths in Grand Finals, it doesn't know much about the teams, and footy is footy...

It worked last year ;)
 
Yes, which raises juicy questions of what the heck happened! 2014 is an interesting year because the Hawks and Swans seemed very evenly matched going in, with hardly anyone predicting a blowout. And when a team wins by 10 goals, you have to think that's no accident. So it should have been predictable and the question is what factors should you have considered to predict it.

IMO last year was a classic case of one team getting on top, momentum just snow balling and the other team just not being able to stop it. I said to my Swans supporting best mate that I wouldn't read too much into that match and the margin. If the GF was a best of 3 it was quite conceivable the Swans come back and win the next two. The competition at the top is so even that you only need a 2 or 3 percent swing in on-ground performance from a team and the margin can easily blow out like last years GF.

Since I've been knowledgeably following football (20 years) I can't remember a better team at cutting up an opposition when they are on top as Hawthorn are. They are the kings of scoreboard pressure IMO and it's so important, particularly in big games, to put points on the scoreboard when you have momentum. Hawks do it better than anyone I can remember. That's what has hurt Freo over the last 3-4 years, and it hurt North in the first quarter against us on Saturday night. North should have been up 6+ goals at quarter time. Over 2015, we've been just as good as Hawks as matching them in that area. We may not have been doing consistently year in year out, but over 2015 we have certainly been brilliant at punishing teams and it's crucial. It really kills a team to have almost all the play in a quarter and only win it by a couple of goals.

I said in the game day thread if either team doesn't turn up, or is slightly off their game, the result could really blow out this weekend. This is much more of a concern for us then the Hawks. Rising teams like the Eagles tend to have off days and big finals bring out the nerves. I'm really hoping the PF scare was just what we needed to snap out of any potential malaise heading into the GF. The Hawks haven't too many off days over the last few years, but they have been more susceptible than normal to them over the last two months, and we saw in the QF that if we get on top we can put them to the sword with the margin in that match rising to 50 points at one stage.

But if both teams turn up and give it their best then it should be a pretty close contest with plenty of points scored which will be great for neutral fans, but perhaps not great for the tickers of us and Hawks supporters.

Like what The Passenger said - momentum is such a huge factor within a match and in the right circumstances it can snowball into a thrashing when most people expected a close match going into it.

Best example of this was the world cup match between Germany and Brazil, most people and most algorithms going into the match had Brazil winning even with Neymar and Silva out.

Same thing with the 2007 and 2008 Grand Finals. Geelong's momentum made a team that beat them at their home ground only a month and a half beforehand nothing more than spectators. 2008 saw Geelong dominate periods but fail to apply scoreboard pressure/Hawthorn mitigating the damage with a dozen rushed behinds when pressured, and then Hawthorn being highly effective when momentum swung their way.

The WC match plus the 2007, 08 and 14 GF's all had periods of momentum where one team pummelled the other in a short space of time enough that they could never get back into the match and broke most or all resistance, leading to a snowball effect.
 
Final Siren as Roby mentioned about premiers never getting thrashed: does this agree with the squiggle in terms of premiers not having large "backwards steps" and (possibly more interestingly) could it predict whether large relative score (60 def 40) or absolute score (120 def 90) beatings fail to happen to eventual premiers?
I've never looked at this, but it's a really interesting idea. It makes intuitive sense and is definitely true for a lot of years.
 
Final Siren as Roby mentioned about premiers never getting thrashed: does this agree with the squiggle in terms of premiers not having large "backwards steps" and (possibly more interestingly) could it predict whether large relative score (60 def 40) or absolute score (120 def 90) beatings fail to happen to eventual premiers?
In 1996 North's six losses were by 30, 67, 79, 61, 18 and 13. The 79 point loss was a home game against the other grand final side and minor premier (Sydney).

Myth busted.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Hawthorn had won 4 of the previous 5 games against the Swans leading up to that GF (their only lose was a game that they were decimated by injury)

The Hawks won the previous clash between the clubs (round 18) at their home ground, a ground that happened to be the venue for the Grand Final

This is of course retrospective though...
It's the North Prelim Final curse. You do not want to beat North in a Prelim, the footy gods get angry with you. In the last 55 years:

2015 West Coast - ?
2014 Sydney - lost GF by 10 goals
2007 Port - lost GF by 20 goals
2000 Melbourne - lost GF by 10 goals
1997 St Kilda - lost GF by 5 goals
1995 Carlton - won GF (outlier event)
1994 Geelong - lost GF by 14 goals
1983 Essendon - lost GF by 14 goals
1979 Collingwood - lost GF by a kick

Some serious floggings in that list.
 
Not really. Doesn't need to be 100% of the time, but if it happens 90% of the time. You can say that it is more likely than not. So one outlier doesn't change much really
If you want another outlier the 2005 Swans lost 120-79 to the Crows in Rnd 4, 104-59 to WC in Rnd 6 and 101-58 to St Kilda in Rnd 10. Went on a nice run after that though...
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

The outlier also happened 19 years ago.

1996 isn't the only but there are other ones obviously. Obviously helps when North 7.16 in one game, and in two of their smashing their opponents have Plugger and Rocca kicking 10 and 8 goals.

If we investigate 1996 further, it was offset that they also had three games where they won by 100+ points and North finished with the best percentage. 1996 squiggle confirms this.

More importantly two things in that year. Every team got smashed. By round 9 in 1996, every team but St Kilda had lost by more than 40 points in one of their games. Sydney their grand final opponents lost a game by 90 points that year. So the greater loss again was to the runner-up.

If you want another outlier the 2005 Swans lost 120-79 to the Crows in Rnd 4, 104-59 to WC in Rnd 6 and 101-58 to St Kilda in Rnd 10. Went on a nice run after that though...

Again in 2005, Sydney had three losses by 40+ points but West Coast lost one game by by 43 points but another by 76 points. Even in this scenario 2005 Sydney win three finals by less than a kick. If we assume that all three games are 50/50 then more than likely we replay that finals series and Sydney lose more often than not.

The team that should've won that year based on this observation was Adelaide, their worst loss 31 points. Their away prelim to West Coast was marred by some dodgy free kicks in favour of the Eagles (what a surprise). The problem with Adelaide that year was they were ranked 9th for attack. Only one team before that, (West Coast 1992) had won the flag ranked that low in attack.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Certified Legendary Thread Race for the flag, in squiggly lines

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top