Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Tuesday, November 20, 2012

Luck and Skill Untangled: The Science of Success | Wired Science | Wired.com

When we post articles which aren’t interesting to you, consider it regression to the mean.

Mauboussin: I think this is a cool analysis. I learned from Tom Tango, a respected sabermetrician, and in statistics it’s called “true score theory.” It can be expressed with a simple equation:

Observed outcome = skill + luck

Here’s the intuition behind it. Say you take a test in math. You’ll get a grade that reflects your true skill — how much of the material you actually know — plus some error that reflects the questions the teacher put on the test. Some days you do better than your skill because the teacher happens to test you only on the material you studied. And some days you do worse than your skill because the teacher happened to include problems you didn’t study. So you grade will reflect your true skill plus some luck.

Of course, we know one of the terms of our equation — the observed outcome — and we can estimate luck.  Estimating luck for a sports team is pretty simple. You assume that each game the team plays is settled by a coin toss. The distribution of win-loss records of the teams in the league follows a binomial distribution. So with these two terms pinned down, we can estimate skill and the relative contribution of skill.

To be more technical, we look at the variance of these terms, but the intuition is that you subtract luck from what happened and are left with skill. This, in turn, lets you assess the relative contribution of the two.

Some aspects of the ranking make sense, and others are not as obvious. For instance, if a game is played one on one, such as tennis, and the match is sufficiently long, you can be pretty sure that the better player will win. As you add players, the role of luck generally rises because the number of interactions rises sharply.

Jim Furtado Posted: November 20, 2012 at 07:47 AM | 5 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: sabermetrics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. depletion Posted: November 20, 2012 at 09:37 AM (#4306599)
The same happens with negative feedback. Should your daughter come home with a poor grade reflecting bad luck, you might chide her and punish her by limiting her time on the computer. Her next test will likely produce a better grade, irrespective of your sermon and punishment.

Of course it's impossible to know if the grade is because of luck so obviously you try to determine why she got the grade: didn't do the homework, test was poorly worded, bad noise/odor in the test room, never really grapsed the material, etc. It's pretty mindless to write off results to "luck" without first seeing if they're "trend".
   2. AROM Posted: November 20, 2012 at 10:53 AM (#4306640)
Depends on the way the test is set up. If it's all multiple choice, with many difficult questions that lead to guessing, then luck is a big factor.

Back in my day, after those of us lucky enough to avoid sabre-tooth tigers made it to school, most of the tests were pretty easy if you read what you were supposed to read and moderately tough if you didn't.
   3. valuearbitrageur Posted: November 20, 2012 at 01:49 PM (#4306814)
In Poker the results = skill + luck works out slightly differently,

because mother ####### donkeys always get way more luck.
   4. Walt Davis Posted: November 20, 2012 at 02:08 PM (#4306836)
Not that it matters much but team outcomes (or batter outcomes) do not strictly meet the assumptions of the binomial distribution. The binomial is (almost certainly) a reasonable approximation. The independence of tests is probably the most "controversial" of the binomial assumptions for baseball (hot and cold streaks).

Also one doesn't normally think of discrete variables in a classical test theory (or "true score theory") way. It doesn't matter much once you're talking outcomes of 162 games or 600 PA but O = T + E is more conformable with continuous variables. For a discrete variable, P(O) = T (not usually expressed as a "true" score but go with it) or in the case of the binomial, E(O) = NT where N is the number of trials, T the true p of success and O the number of successes. As N gets large, the binomial approximates a normal distribution for most baseball-y values of T.
   5. dr. scott Posted: November 20, 2012 at 03:47 PM (#4306912)
Daniel Kahneman descirbes this quite well in thinking fast and Slow when an Israeli general tells him that positive feedback never works and negative feedback always works. when he praised cadets for a clean execution of some maneuver, the next time they try they usually dont do nearly as good, and whever he yelled at someone for screwing up, they always did better.

Kahneman was quite excited by this as he saw this as a perfect example of regression to the mean, but realized that regression ot the mean is one of the main reasons why people think megative feedback is so effective. This of course is most true in cases where you only praise or reprimand serious outliers. Yhere will always be a distribution of talent of course.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Martin Hemner
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogSchool of Roch: Melky Cabrera a "fallback option" for the Orioles
(28 - 9:30pm, Nov 25)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - November 2014
(1134 - 9:29pm, Nov 25)
Last: madvillain

NewsblogOTP Politics November 2014: Mets Deny Bias in Ticket Official’s Firing
(4843 - 9:29pm, Nov 25)
Last: Joe Kehoskie

NewsblogRolling Stone: The 15 Worst Owners in Sports
(38 - 9:27pm, Nov 25)
Last: Dag is a salt water fish in fresh water world

NewsblogJazayerli: The Legacy Of The 2014 Royals, Part 1.
(42 - 9:08pm, Nov 25)
Last: 'Spos stares out the window, waits for spring

Newsblogred sox - So … is there any money left for pitching? Red Sox roster building reconsidered - WEEI | Alex Speier
(120 - 9:02pm, Nov 25)
Last: Zach

NewsblogBig Unit, Pedro, Smoltz headline Hall of Fame ballot
(79 - 8:19pm, Nov 25)
Last: Booey

NewsblogOz: Mike Trout Q&A: His workouts, goals & what he’s thankful for
(10 - 7:46pm, Nov 25)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogKap: Cubs have made 'significant' offer to Jon Lester | CSN Chicago
(4 - 7:34pm, Nov 25)
Last: tfbg9

NewsblogMeet the teenagers who landed a shocking MLB scoop
(40 - 7:27pm, Nov 25)
Last: Joe Kehoskie

NewsblogHow Twitter Has Changed Baseball Coverage For Better or Worse
(7 - 6:38pm, Nov 25)
Last: RMc is a fine piece of cheese

NewsblogWendy Thurm on Twitter: "What the hell kinda panda is that?"
(6 - 6:33pm, Nov 25)
Last: RMc is a fine piece of cheese

NewsblogAdam Rubin: My Hall of Fame ballot
(50 - 6:24pm, Nov 25)
Last: Kiko Sakata

NewsblogOT:  Soccer (the Round, True Football), November 2014
(514 - 5:51pm, Nov 25)
Last: jmurph

NewsblogThe Effects of Pitch Sequencing – The Hardball Times
(4 - 4:26pm, Nov 25)
Last: madvillain

Page rendered in 0.2137 seconds
52 querie(s) executed