The Showdown Myth Exploded

[Vader]

For a long time now there has been a myth that Showdowns are always tough, tightly contested affairs, almost always resulting in a close result - no matter where the combatants are on the ladder.

I thought I'd take a look at this myth, from a statistical point of view.

Number of Showdowns: 20
Port wins: 11
Adelaide wins: 9

Average winning margins:
Port: 20.27
Adelaide: 39.56

Number of wins, margin < 10 points:
Port: 4
Adelaide: 3

Number of wins, margin > 30 points:
Port: 2
Adelaide: 5

What do these numbers indicate?

When Port win, the game is likely to be close - just as the myth suggests.
When Adelaide win, the result is more likely to be carnage than it is to be close. Myth busted.

 

[*PAF]

For a long time now there has been a myth that Showdowns are always tough, tightly contested affairs, almost always resulting in a close result - no matter where the combatants are on the ladder.

I thought I'd take a look at this myth, from a statistical point of view.

Number of Showdowns: 20
Port wins: 11
Adelaide wins: 9

Average winning margins:
Port: 20.27
Adelaide: 39.56

Number of wins, margin < 10 points:
Port: 4
Adelaide: 3

Number of wins, margin > 30 points:
Port: 2
Adelaide: 5

What do these numbers indicate?

When Port win, the game is likely to be close - just as the myth suggests.
When Adelaide win, the result is more likely to be carnage than it is to be close. Myth busted.

It could also mean that you lot need a team that is much better than ours to win on the day.
If the teams are about even then Port will win.

 

[Southerntakeover]

I think the change from a close showdown has really only occured recently, with the last 5 or so (except for Heritage round) resulting in a 'blow out' style scoreline.

 

[Smoooothy]

these numbers indicate that port are currently our bitches!!!

 

[just maybe]

It could also mean that you lot need a team that is much better than ours to win on the day.
If the teams are about even then Port will win.

Wrong. It's only 4-3 your way in tight games. Doesn't suggest that at all. I'd say it more suggests that Port give up easier.

 

[Mong]

This reminds me of another myth relating to Showdowns.

Showdowns are always 50-50 and anyone can win.

If that isn't the biggest myth around then I don't know what is. Since the calender clicked over from 1999 to 2000 there have been 14 showdowns. It's fair to say only two of those have been won by the underdog, or the lesser team. The first of 2000, when we came back from a huge deficit led by Mark Ricciuto (and Peter Vardy - showing just how long ago that was) and then the first showdown of 2004 when we surprisingly came away with the win.

Every other showdown has been won by the team who was better.

So, once and for all can we end this myth that Showdowns are 50-50? I'm sick of constantly being told by the media that it doesn't matter where the teams are on the ladder these games and go either way.

 

[*PAF]

This reminds me of another myth relating to Showdowns.

Showdowns are always 50-50 and anyone can win.

If that isn't the biggest myth around then I don't know what is. Since the calender clicked over from 1999 to 2000 there have been 14 showdowns. It's fair to say only two of those have been won by the underdog, or the lesser team. The first of 2000, when we came back from a huge deficit led by Mark Ricciuto (and Peter Vardy - showing just how long ago that was) and then the first showdown of 2004 when we surprisingly came away with the win.

Every other showdown has been won by the team who was better.

So, once and for all can we end this myth that Showdowns are 50-50? I'm sick of constantly being told by the media that it doesn't matter where the teams are on the ladder these games and go either way.

Are you underselling your team in 2002 and 2003?
The real question is how many games have you won when you were below us on the ladder Vs how many games have we won when below you on the ladder.

 

[*PAF]

Wrong. It's only 4-3 your way in tight games. Doesn't suggest that at all. I'd say it more suggests that Port give up easier.

Plus we have a stupid tendency to try and shut down games when we are in front.

 

[- PC -]

these numbers indicate that port are currently our bitches!!!

Which leads me to a question

Including pre -season what is the streak ie wins in a row for Adelaide. 5?

 

[NikkiNoo]

Which leads me to a question

Including pre -season what is the streak ie wins in a row for Adelaide. 5?

yep

lost in pre-season last year, won the two games last year, won the finals game and then this year won the pre-season and saturday's game going along nicely!

 

[- PC -]

yep

lost in pre-season last year, won the two games last year, won the finals game and then this year won the pre-season and saturday's game going along nicely!

Thanks NN

Is that the best streak for either side? ( portentous and her streaking not included of course)

 

[drakeyv2]

Maybe it has more to do with the coaches.

Williams/Ayres 7-2
Craig/Williams 4-1

 

[Stiffy_18]

Thanks NN

Is that the best streak for either side? ( portentous and her streaking not included of course)

Nope.

Port have won 7 proper showdowns on the trot. I am not sure about pre-season results as I don't take much notive of them.

 

[RoosterLad]

Rucci said in todays paper "by the time Adelaide break the record streak, they will have taken the lead". Hes basically saying we are guaranteed to win the next 4 Showdowns.

 

[Mong]

I noticed that too, RoosterLad. Another very odd take on things by Rucci.

What sort of Journalist makes assumptions like that? Very odd indeed.

 

[GoSarge]

In the end, its two teams trying their best to win.

Why should a showdown be any different to any other AFL football game ? Sure it probably would be more tough in the first 10 minutes of the game than most others, but that intensity never lasts for the entire game. Quite simply, the best team usually wins (be it a close game or blowout).

 

[Vader]

Lets take a look at how they've unfolded:

97-00:
Port: 4 wins
Adelaide: 4 wins

Adelaide might have won the flag in 97 & 98, but they were in no way a dominant side (finishing 4th & 5th at the end of the minor rounds). Results split evenly when no team was clearly superior to the other.

01-04:
Port: 7 wins
Adelaide: 1 win

This period includes Port's streak of 7 consecutive victories (started in R22 2000). Adelaide were a good side, making the prelim final in 2002. However, Port were clearly a class above Adelaide, one of the two dominant teams in the competition (along with Brisbane).

The win in R7 2004 was clearly a major upset, taking place in Port's premiership year.

05-06
Port: 0 wins
Adelaide: 4 wins

Port's decline after tasting premiership success was very rapid indeed. For the past 18 months Adelaide have been the superior side and this is reflected in the Showdown results.

In summary:
When Adelaide & Port are evenly matched (as they were in 97-00) then the Showdown results reflect this evenness.
When one team or the other is clearly superior, the result almost (with only one obvious exception) always goes to the better team. However, as I showed in my initial post, when Port win the result is usually relatively close, whereas Adelaide victories tend towards the carnage end of the spectrum.

 

[DaveW]

01-04:
Port: 7 wins
Adelaide: 1 win

This period includes Port's streak of 7 consecutive victories (started in R22 2000). Adelaide were a good side, making the prelim final in 2002. However, Port were clearly a class above Adelaide, one of the two dominant teams in the competition (along with Brisbane).

The last five of those seven straight wins were won by margins of 8 points, 8 points, 8 points (sic), 12 points and 16 points.

Whether they coming through in the close ones makes them a "class above" or they were just that bit luckier, well that comes down to opinion...

In summary:
When Adelaide & Port are evenly matched (as they were in 97-00) then the Showdown results reflect this evenness.
When one team or the other is clearly superior, the result almost (with only one obvious exception) always goes to the better team.

Hmmm, a couple of things I don't like about this conclusion though:

The difference between Adelaide and Port in 1997-98 when the results split 2-2 was probably greater than the difference between the two sides in 2001-03 when the results split 6-0.

Our sole win in 2001-04 was one hell of an exception, coming in what was by far our worst season in that four year period.