tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14955809.post115111137753292655..comments2024-02-08T13:13:49.679-08:00Comments on Statistically Speaking: How Accurate is the Pythagorean Theorem in College Football?matthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07863019168368782406noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14955809.post-75640539516628514632008-10-02T11:32:00.000-07:002008-10-02T11:32:00.000-07:00I actually started by looking at 1986, which could...I actually started by looking at 1986, which could provide a nice sanity check for the last five years. And the best exponent was 1.8 for that year too.Matt Crawfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07811131021337684323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14955809.post-77826771245681929242008-10-02T11:30:00.000-07:002008-10-02T11:30:00.000-07:00I don't know if you'll see this comment on such an...I don't know if you'll see this comment on such an old post, but I just took a look at the last 5 years, and the best exponent for college is much lower, at 1.8.<BR/><BR/>I'm guessing that the number of blowouts actually decreases the best exponent, because putting up 55 points doesn't really mean you have a good team. In the NFL, putting up a lot of points is much more indicative of quality.<BR/><BR/>I have a big spreadsheet if you want it.Matt Crawfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07811131021337684323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14955809.post-1154010815833657462006-07-27T07:33:00.000-07:002006-07-27T07:33:00.000-07:00How do you decide what the "correct" exponent for ...How do you decide what the "correct" exponent for the pythagorean formula is? If you're fitting it to previous data, that seems like the statistical version of telling yourself what you want to hear. :-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14955809.post-1151452418135371402006-06-27T16:53:00.000-07:002006-06-27T16:53:00.000-07:00Excellent.Nothing breaks up the doldrums of late-J...Excellent.<BR/><BR/>Nothing breaks up the doldrums of late-June like some pythagoras.Hoya Suxahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00510709064957284010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14955809.post-1151451755761158962006-06-27T16:42:00.000-07:002006-06-27T16:42:00.000-07:00Thanks, Matt. Actually I did use 2.37. I should ha...Thanks, Matt. Actually I did use 2.37. I should have mentioned that in the body of the post.matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07863019168368782406noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14955809.post-1151368272802612932006-06-26T17:31:00.000-07:002006-06-26T17:31:00.000-07:00Matt, Nice job with the pythagoras stuff. Just to...Matt, <BR/><BR/>Nice job with the pythagoras stuff. <BR/><BR/>Just to make sure that your data accurate, the exponent for the pythagorean formula is not 2. It's actually closer to 2.37. <BR/><BR/>(Note: The 2.37 exponent is actually the correct value for NFL football, but given the fact that I haven't sat down and gone through enough college football games to come up with an applicable exponent for the college version, the 2.37 value is sufficient.)<BR/><BR/>If you want to double check your numbers, I put together a pythagoras table for 2004 and 2005 on my blog a while back. The link is:<BR/><BR/>http://orange44.blogspot.com/2005/12/bonanza-of-numbers-part-i.html<BR/><BR/>The difference should be negligible, but it can never hurt to be sure.Hoya Suxahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00510709064957284010noreply@blogger.com