Subject: "Quick note on pros vs. amateurs:" Previous topic | Next topic
Printer-friendly copy Email this topic to a friend CF Website
Top General Discussions Gameplay Topic #15806
Show all folders

ValguarneraThu 04-Jan-07 11:08 AM
Member since 04th Mar 2003
6904 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author Click to add this author to your buddy list
#15825, "Quick note on pros vs. amateurs:"


          

I agree the effects are probably very subtle. The books I've read on this all dealt with professional athletes, since accurate statistics and opinion polls were available. So we're only talking about people who have probably taken over a million shots or swings in their life. If they were easily rattled, or had serious consistency problems, they wouldn't be professional athletes.

Gould talks about this in light of the disappearance of the .400 hitter in Full House. Basically, the worst guy in MLB used to be some shlub (and probably on the Phillies). Nowadays, the worst guy in MLB is an amazing athlete who has the misfortune of being around roughly 1,000 slightly more amazing athletes (and probably is still on the Phillies). As human performance approaches its limits like that, everyone loses the ability to "take over" a game, and trends like "clutch hitting" or "hot hand" wash out.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote

HOT TopicThe "Hot Hand", and interpreting logs. [View all] , Valguarnera, Wed 03-Jan-07 04:26 PM
Reply Good post, Sandello, 04-Jan-07 11:21 PM, #26
Reply Nice post:, Tac, 04-Jan-07 10:27 AM, #16
Reply Agreed to your point. But "hot hands"?, TheDude, 03-Jan-07 11:26 PM, #5
Reply RE: Agreed to your point. But, Valguarnera, 04-Jan-07 12:24 AM, #7
     Reply RE: Agreed to your point. But, Isildur, 04-Jan-07 02:32 AM, #9
     Reply RE: Agreed to your point. But, Eskelian, 04-Jan-07 06:59 AM, #11
     Reply RE: Agreed to your point. But, Valkenar, 04-Jan-07 11:59 AM, #19
          Reply RE: Agreed to your point. But, Valguarnera, 04-Jan-07 01:14 PM, #21
               Reply RE: Agreed to your point. But, Eskelian, 04-Jan-07 02:40 PM, #23
     Reply RE: Agreed to your point. But, Valguarnera, 04-Jan-07 09:15 AM, #13
          Reply Some clutch numbers:, TheDude, 04-Jan-07 10:14 PM, #25
     Reply Statistics vs. scope and integrals, TheDude, 04-Jan-07 04:12 AM, #10
Reply Some remarks, Dwoggurd, 03-Jan-07 07:22 PM, #1
     Reply RE: Some remarks, Valguarnera, 03-Jan-07 07:53 PM, #2
     Reply There is more than just probability, Dwoggurd, 03-Jan-07 08:37 PM, #3
          Reply If you didn't, I suggest reading the cited article(s)....., Tac, 03-Jan-07 10:54 PM, #4
          Reply Conditional probability:, Valguarnera, 03-Jan-07 11:50 PM, #6
               Reply Invalid application, Dwoggurd, 04-Jan-07 08:18 AM, #12
                    Reply RE: Invalid example, Tac, 04-Jan-07 09:40 AM, #15
                    Reply RE: Invalid application, Marcus_, 04-Jan-07 10:31 AM, #17
     Reply RE: Whitecloaks, vargal, 04-Jan-07 12:57 AM, #8
     Reply Muscle Memory, Chuntog, 04-Jan-07 09:37 AM, #14
          Reply Quick note on pros vs. amateurs:, Valguarnera, 04-Jan-07 11:08 AM #18
               Reply That's harsh, Chuntog, 04-Jan-07 01:03 PM, #20
                    Reply Blind Side!, Valguarnera, 04-Jan-07 01:41 PM, #22
                         Reply RE: Blind Side!, Straklaw, 04-Jan-07 04:47 PM, #24
Top General Discussions Gameplay Topic #15806 Previous topic | Next topic