GP Final Analysis and Predictions

[draqq]

Could it be possible that most of the research studies on home advantage are conducted about "team sport" (e.g., baseball, basketball, ice hockey, etc.) where subjectivity in scoring is minimum?
A research study I came upon in 2010 concluded that the host‐country and same‐region biases are statistically significant in figure skating (http://www.dartmouth.edu/~ericz/transparency.pdf.). Of course, I did not and am too lazy to do a comprehensive literature review.

You also have to consider the fact that most home skaters don't have to travel too much. Jet lag plays a large role in how well skaters do, especially near the beginning and middle of the season.

 

[OS]

I think you should read this link very carefully.

Uh...I think I will ignore the accusation of being a racist for now just because I don't agree with the judging (surprised this discussion even took on this direction - hopefully it wasn't intentional).

Sorry to have take up so much space on this thread, but I will just finish up my position on this discussion until the GPF results. I hope the winner to be someone who is judged on the merit of what they are able to deliver on the day. One that is not based on having or taking certain advantages of the rules, but on the strength of their performance and technical content.

While you can throw the rule book at me, the bottom line is certain skaters @ home ice, their performance might be more or less the same (and sometimes worse according to jcoates which I do agree with), but it is the 'judging' can often appear more favourable if they are from a strong federation. They just get better hiding it behind the rule books within the small degrees of variance in scoring which could adds up and make a difference. I am sure I am not alone in noticing this trend watching figure skating over the years. This is not me accusing of Judges of deliberate foul play but acknowledging environmental factors can affect human judgment, and certain decisions and influences are likely to subject to socio economic factors in which this sport is highly sensitive to. The influence only become more visible and obvious when the skaters failed to deliver what they are suppose to like Mao has done at NHK as an example that benchmarked her as the highest LP performer this year, which actually could help her in the long run when she goes clean (even on the same lesser content like she has now compared with everyone else) and continues to be unfairly to others.

Thanks to skatinginbc's research study reference from Dartmouth, its conclusion support the above views quote below:

I have shown in this paper that figure skaters benefit from a compatriot on their judging panel, that this benefit likely reflects a combination of nationalistic bias and vote trading, and that this benefit has risen slightly over time. The increase in the combination of bias and vote trading was despite a reform that was purportedly intended to reduce it. A key component of that reform was eliminating transparency into which judge gave which score. Eliminating transparency was designed to make it harder to parties to collusive agreements to monitor judges, but this came at the cost of making monitoring by outsiders harder as well.
......
One can thus view the ISU's anonymity reform as a well‐intentioned attempt to reduce corruption that failed due to insufficiently effective internal monitoring. A less optimistic view is that the ISU's goal was to reduce the perception of corruption rather than actual corruption. If current perceptions of corruption are underestimates, or if limited attention is expected to lead to underestimates in the absence of information in the future, then reducing transparency can be an end in itself.

While you can accuse my views are based on 'hasty generalization', I would equally challenge the COP is built on a fallacy system of numeric variables that has enough of threshold to be able to be manipulated within a small margin within the rules, and able to be done anonymously without accountability.

While it may be natural to trust in numeric/statistical data that seems to imply on things that are identical, but in reality these judgements are based on 'cognition' and 'interpretation' therefore are subject to all sort of 'residual' problems (reputation, impressions, influencing) and 'latency' problems (judgement during the competition 'in the moment' and after the competition upon reflection are not equal).

The judges project their views with numerous levels of sophistication, knowledge of skater's history, perceived levels, personal biases, what they feel at that moment in time and are all subject to environmental factors even if they tries their best to be as professional as possible. The COP rules apparently also involve modifying statistical values annually based on propositions and support from strong federations and somehow cherry picked fixes that ends up favour certain factions/skaters. It ends up impossible to have a coherent comparison to truly compare the standards beyond what these numbers apply. The disagreement like this then ends up being about who can were able to cherry pick the best statistics to support their views, who knows the rule (and change) better, but it fails to address the logic if the performance themselves don't stand up relative to everyone else in the field, why does it not show up in their scores. While PCS indicate a superior skater, yet high PCS should not be deserved when the skater failed to deliver a superior performance that has mistakes and lacks a competitive technical content, compares to everyone else and themselves previously.

Could it be by only observing and believing in the relativity, we are blinded by the possibility these fundamental numerics could be wrong in the first place?

When you have 3 clean triples program at NHK ends up being the highest LP score out of this season relative to others without a 3:3, 3A or a true Lutz. This certainly would not fly in 6.0 where beauty and artistry is even more appreciated than under COP, which seems to be the argument raised by many to justify Mao's score (that along with relative to Alena's score, which I'd argue is somewhat overmarked as well). And I'd argue 3 missing triple jumps of high difficulty is too big of a deal of score in this sport, when just 1 successful triple is the difference between a gold and a silver at the Olympics for Michelle Kwan.

Imo, a field-leading performances should really able to stand up on its own merit regardless of the rules and any judging system.

With the COP system, it may explain better the 'how' they got there, but they clearly does not explain the 'why'. The fact is Mao's highest LP at NHK along with the < and flutz would certainly NOT have earned her the same mark in a competition in Skate America 1 or 2 year ago, before the < and flutz rule change this year which makes these mistake less costly. Or even stack up to her previous scores with better technical content and performance. Infact if I remember correctly (feel free to correct if I remembered wrong), ISU increased the value of 3A last year so an under rotated 3A is worth as much as a true Lutz; increased the value of 3Loop, reduced the general value for lutz as well as 3:3s and GOEs, while making falls/under rotations/edge calls less costly. That is the reality COP system I am questioning.

Regarding to the levels, it is a matter of taking your word that it is technical and therefore most take it for grant it is accurate. But actually the investigative logic in me would be wondering if it because it is so technical that nobody ever bother to question it and assumes it is always true. Carolina suddenly raised by 2 levels @ COC... sorry but that makes me even more suspicious, but I will let that be for now. There are tons of better things to do on Sunday weekends

So upcoming GPF should be interesting... go Liza and Dai!!

 

[Mrs. P]

When you have 3 clean triples program at NHK ends up being the highest LP score out of this season relative to others without a 3:3, 3A or a true Lutz. This certainly would not fly in 6.0 where beauty and artistry is even more appreciated than under COP, which seems to be the argument raised by many to justify Mao's score (that along with relative to Alena's score, which I'd argue is somewhat overmarked as well). And I'd argue 3 missing triple jumps of high difficulty is too big of a deal of score in this sport, when just 1 successful triple is the difference between a gold and a silver at the Olympics for Michelle Kwan.

But here's the thing about 6.0. If Mao did that same NHK performance under 6.0, her flutz would have barely been noticed (Several American skaters have fared well including Sarah Hughes and Sasha Cohen despite being flutzers), nor would the URs. Many people have noted that neither Tara Lipinski nor Sarah Hughes would have likely won under COP because they would be hit with edge calls and URs. In fact the 3L-3L that won Tara Lipinski gold in 1998 probably would not be ratified in COP today, the second jump would have been UR.

In 6.0, what mattered more is the number of triples landed without falling. So by that thought Mao landed six triples. She might have gotten -.2 or -.3 for the flutz, but they did not have a mechanism to deduct for UR triples.

Back to COP — 125 at NHK is hardly Mao's best score. She is capable of being a 130+ skater when she has a 3A and 3-3. So it makes sense she's more of a 120-125 skater with out either element.

 

[jcoates]

Could it be possible that most of the research studies on home advantage are conducted about "team sport" (e.g., baseball, basketball, ice hockey, etc.) where subjectivity in scoring is minimum?
A research study I came upon in 2010 concluded that the host‐country and same‐region biases are statistically significant in figure skating (http://www.dartmouth.edu/~ericz/transparency.pdf.). Of course, I did not and am too lazy to do a comprehensive literature review.

Please note that my post was carefully written to refer to performance by the skaters relative to home ice advantage rather than to how they are judged. The only comment about judging was at the end. Even the examples I listed were references to how the competitors skated rather than how they placed. (e.g. I/K's placement was terrific given it was a debut at senior worlds; but they skated below what their best level.) I clearly accounted for other factors that are more likely to directly affect performance (and are often attributed to home ice advantage through over-simplified logic). Also, any subjectivity involved in judging skating can only take place after the skater has actually performed the program. Judged sport of not, the skater is still an athlete who must master the ability to compete under pressure and in a variety of settings and conditions.

We put far too much emphasis in skating's status as a judged sport IMO. If the skaters perform up to ability, there is less opportunity to fiddle with marks. It's up to the skater to do his/her job first. Under COP, chances of a fix are far less likely.

BTW, the studies I read while in school referred not just to team sports, but also to individual ones. As IP noted (and I did as well), some athletes respond well to the added variable of competing at home, while others crumble.

 

[Mathman]

Please note that my post was carefully written to refer to performance by the skaters relative to home ice advantage rather than to how they are judged.

That is quite interesting, because statistically the home team always wins more often than the visitors.

I just made a ten second search and found that in NHL (hockey) playoff games, the percentage is 60% (although last year was an anomaly).

NBA basketball 59%.

NFL football: regular season 57%, playoffs 68%.

So if the home team doesn't perform any better, we have to look to the referees, umpires and judges, right?

 

[prettykeys]

The three examples I chose were the first ones off the top of my head this season, which coincidentally happened to support the appearance of such a home advantage. However, if you cast the net of examples wider (as ImaginaryPogue and hurrah have both pointed out) there are much more examples demonstrating otherwise. Carolina Kostner, for instance, received 2 level one spins in her LP at Skate America, while her spins in China were all level 4s. I don't think China is exactly Carolina's home turf, or is even on her home continent. So yes, coincidence.

Not that I disagree with you about Mao, but assuming what os says is true or has some grain of truth in it regarding Federation influence, your example regarding Carolina does not disprove her assertion at all. Carolina is neither American or Chinese, so this example just shows that differences in Levels could happen without any favouritism. It doesn't mean that favouritism is non-existent in cases where skaters backed by strong federations skate at international events on home turf.

Separately, let's not forget: Shin Amano.

Could it be possible that most of the research studies on home advantage are conducted about "team sport" (e.g., baseball, basketball, ice hockey, etc.) where subjectivity in scoring is minimum?

...perhaps, or perhaps also individual sports like tennis that are less nationalistically charged than figure skating. Your article was an interesting read.

But here's the thing about 6.0. If Mao did that same NHK performance under 6.0, her flutz would have barely been noticed (Several American skaters have fared well including Sarah Hughes and Sasha Cohen [and Michelle Kwan] despite being flutzers), nor would the URs.

Many people have noted that neither Tara Lipinski nor Sarah Hughes would have likely won under COP because they would be hit with edge calls and URs. In fact the 3L-3L that won Tara Lipinski gold in 1998 probably would not be ratified in COP today, the second jump would have been UR.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZhIs6OIJ-I&t=2m49s Tara Lipinski's 3Lo-3Lo downgraded? I don't think so...

 

[prettykeys]

Please note that my post was carefully written to refer to performance by the skaters relative to home ice advantage rather than to how they are judged.

That is quite interesting, because statistically the home team always wins more often than the visitors.

I just made ten second search and found that in NHL (hockey) playoff games, the percentage is 60% (although last year was an anomaly).

NBA basketball 59%.

NFL football: regular season 57%, playoffs 68%.

So if the home team doesn't perform any better, we have to look to the referees, umpires and judges, right?

Your deduction is reasonable.

 

[Mrs. P]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZhIs6OIJ-I&t=2m49s Tara Lipinski's 3Lo-3Lo downgraded? I don't think so...

I didn't say DG, I said UR. Under the current rules there is a difference. As we've discussed extensively on this board, 3LO-combos are not ratified as much these days. It's hard to watch based on that YT video, but I could see a strict tech caller declaring it UR. For the record, I think Tara was the rightful winner (even thought at the time I was upset about it) of Olympic Gold. I only made that point to counter os168's argument that Mao's performance would have not done well in 6.0 — in contrast, it would have likely been fine because of the greater emphasis on clean programs and less on whether the jumps were free of UR/edge calls.

And are you saying that Michelle Kwan was a flutzer?

 

[Mathman]

And are you saying that Michelle Kwan was a flutzer?

She had a kind of flatsy-watsy sometime-y Lutz. If you held your head at just the right angle when you watched, it was sort of on an outside edge.

 

[prettykeys]

I didn't say DG, I said UR. Under the current rules there is a difference. As we've discussed extensively on this board, 3LO-combos are not ratified as much these days. It's hard to watch based on that YT video, but I could see a strict tech caller declaring it UR. For the record, I think Tara was the rightful winner (even thought at the time I was upset about it) of Olympic Gold. I only made that point to counter os168's argument that Mao's performance would have not done well in 6.0 — in contrast, it would have likely been fine because of the greater emphasis on clean programs and less on whether the jumps were free of UR/edge calls.

Sorry, I don't think it was UR. The first time I watched it, I was amazed and replayed it again and again. Neither 3Lo in the combo would get a <. By how many degrees do you think it was underrotated to receive a <?

And are you saying that Michelle Kwan was a flutzer?

In 1998, yes. A 3Lz(e). When she improved it in later years, she may have gotten true 3Lz but sometimes it would have been a 3Lz(!).

 

[Mrs. P]

Sorry, I don't think it was UR. The first time I watched it, I was amazed and replayed it again and again. Neither 3Lo in the combo would get a <. By how many degrees do you think it was underrotated to receive a <?

In 1998, yes. A 3Lz(e). When she improved it in later years, she may have gotten true 3Lz but sometimes it would have been a 3Lz(!).

I probably should clarify that I personally think it was fine. I only make the point to point out that Mao's 3-triple jump program would have been fine in 6.0, when in 6.0 they didn't really hyperanalyze the jumps to the level they do under COP.

All I'm saying is that I could see a strict tech caller could call it < and if Michelle vs. Tara played out in COP, I could see people analyzing that combo and nitpicking at it for days.

Also, I have heard others have the same discussion about whether Lipinksi's 3-loop combos would have fared as well under COP. Some feel she would have had them ratified, others not so much.

 

[prettykeys]

I probably should clarify that I personally think it was fine. I only make the point to point out that Mao's 3-triple jump program would have been fine in 6.0, when in 6.0 they didn't really hyperanalyze the jumps to the level they do under COP.

That's fine, but I get tetchy when Tara's skating is torn apart often by fans of another skater (not you, Mrs. P), when their favoured skater's weaknesses aren't likewise mentioned.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88xpDflZ-lU&feature=youtu.be&t=4m03s

That's further proof that I'm not hallucinating or creating a conspiracy theory.

Also, I have heard others have the same discussion about whether Lipinksi's 3-loop combos would have fared as well under COP. Some feel she would have had them ratified, others not so much.

I haven't seen all of her performed 3Lo-3Lo's to comment on them as a whole, but the one at the Olympics was mint, and I'd question the bias of those others who said it should be decreased in value. (Perhaps it wouldn't get high GOE, but other than that it looks clean as any 3Lo's could be.)

 

[jcoates]

That is quite interesting, because statistically the home team always wins more often than the visitors.

I just made a ten second search and found that in NHL (hockey) playoff games, the percentage is 60% (although last year was an anomaly).

NBA basketball 59%.

NFL football: regular season 57%, playoffs 68%.

So if the home team doesn't perform any better, we have to look to the referees, umpires and judges, right?

I think you are making a couple of assumptions. First, if a home team or athlete's performance meets statistical standards, it is good enough to win. Second, the assumption is that the opponent will not produce a greater than average performance thus affecting the presumed result. So the conclusion is that judges/officials must be responsible for fouling up the result.

Yet the inclusion of team sports overlooks the fact that they often compete at the same venue (home field) for at least half of their games. That familiarity with the nuances of the venue (sight lines, noise, wind, quality of surface (grass, ice, hardwood), sloping, temperature, humidity, etc. can affect performance. Of course that could also explain why athlete in individual sports perform well at certain non home venues over time. They simply become used to them. However, in skating such familiarity with competition venues is less common, since many events are held in multi-purpose arenas not used for everyday training. (Trust me, as lost Redskins fan, I am quite familiar with the total uselessness of home field advantage.) In golf, arguably the major sport least affected by regular intervention by officials, the design of the course, it's length and width, type of grass, etc. are far more determinative of success than national of local origin. Even in the Olympics when home athletes outpace the usual medal counts for the host nation, that is arguably due as much or more to having used many of the venues for training prior to the event than to any boost in crowd support.

Still, I find the assumptions above to be a far too restrictive point of view. Your statistical examples from the sports you mentioned assume that those winning percentages are indicative of the performance of all athletes across all other sports. Note that in tennis, despite vast institutional riches, the largest permanent venue in the sport, massive crowds that break annual attendance records and are highly partisan, a favorable surface which is usually tweaked to suit American players, favorable scheduling of matches to ensure maximum support, etc., the US has failed to produce a men's champion at the US Open since 2003. (In fact, each of the majors has a current lengthy streak of failure in spite of similar structural and financial advantages.) There have been men who have performed well over that span (chiefly Agassi and Roddick). Sometimes that performance is to expectations (Roddick F 2006). In others it is above expectation (Agassi F 2005, Ginepri SF 2005). Yet no tournament victories. American men traditionally have had very strong summers leading into the Open, winning many of the US Open series events or placing well in them. Yet no US Open titles. Are the chair umpires to blame for this raft of quarterfinal and semifinal finishes? What about the linesmen? Could it be that other factors are at play rather than the easy assumption that the officials are at fault? Could it be that the quality and depth (Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray) of competition has risen relative to the period when Americans were dominant? Could it also be true that the former advantage that the quick cement surface once provided is no longer relevant because top foreign players have adjusted their games to handle it? Is it also possible, that those foreign players enjoy the rowdy NYC crowd more than foreign players of the past, thus negating them as a distraction? What about technical changes, like the fact that racquet technology and physical training have combined to make return of serve so potent that huge servers like Roddick are less of a factor than in the past? In fact, all of these things have proven to be true and are more likely factors to explain the American drought than so called home field advantage.

Also the assumption among many posters here has been that home ice advantage will either boost performance above normal levels, or it will affect judging to inflate scores. Home field advantage only matters when the athlete is winning or close to winning. It can serve as a potential emotional boost or spark an adrenaline rush just as much as it can lead to cramping and underperformance in the crucial moment. It is not the cause of the athlete winning or losing. It is simply another factor in the process.

 

[ImaginaryPogue]

Thoughts on the GP Season thus far, junior and senior

PAIRS
1. Doesn’t it feel like the promise from last year’s worlds has been reneged upon this season? The battle we were promised between S/S and V/T has withered. Not only have S/S not posted a long program score to beat V/T, B/L’s highest LP score beats them too. Now, it would be okay if V/T were dazzling themselves, but they really aren’t – their programs aren’t great. And what makes it even worse is that S/S’ long program is one of the best ever – so ambitious and different that I forgive all the flaws, but of course – the judges can’t.

..... That’s what I wrote before Cup of Russia. And this is why we never prejudge things. Not only have S/S posted a score that is higher than V/T’s best, K/S have broken the 130 barrier, their best LP score tops V/T’s. Triggers a massive level of excitement for the GPF, doesn’t it? And to be fair, I’m more disappointed by V/T’s programs (I expected masterpieces for the all time list) then I expected to be.

Is anyone else getting a Petrova/Tikhonov type feeling surrounding Kavaguti/Smirnov? They’re not the Russian number ones, and it’s unlikely they’ll ever be. They’ve won a couple world bronzes and Euros gold, so nothing to be dismissive about. And I wouldn’t have said they were capable of much more.... except they have two sensational programs this year and are skating with more confidence than before. V/T (like B/S in P/T’s time) are gonna be the number one and the big guns heading into Sochi, but I really do hope that K/S can sneak through and win the World title I was hoping for last year.

2. But not only that – the absence of Pang/Tong shows you just how close to an end the Chinese domination of pairs is coming. Wait, that’s wrong. The domination is done. The real question now; are they going to go back to the days where S/Z would score medals throughout the season, but cede the ground to the Russians (or Canadians then/Germans now). The Zhangs greatest strength – some explosive elements – is gone and all the praise of their newfound artistry seems vacuous at best. And Sui/Han... well, it’s nice that they just go for it, but so many weaknesses mar what they do. Pang/Tong are strong skaters, but they aren’t strong enough to skip half a competitive season and come out on top. I’m more curious about where Zhang/Zhang stack up next to the second tier teams as the season heats up.

3. The story in Canada and the USA is the exact same story we saw last season. Canada had two teams start separating themselves from the rest, and it’s those two teams that are doing the same. The USA was a muddle and it remains so. Yes, E/L are pretty and should be fine. Yes, D/C have some strong elements. Yes, blah blah blah – American pairs is an oxymoron (except on the junior circuit. Fingers crossed). Mt/M came on a lot stronger than I expected, and I think they may defend their National title. D/R have that 60+ point base value that means they can absorb a lot in mistakes (see the TEB LP if you doubt me). I’m actually glad that D/R made it to the GPF over Mt/M – I think the former needs to get a lot more mileage on the program before it peaks, but both are basically gonna be challenging the 120 mark, which is awesome. Lawrence/Swiegers.... needed to be more consistent. They also were one of the teams majorly affected by the change in the GP rules. Being the third team in a nation of two slots will likely be the story of this season as well.

4. Little disappointed with Takahashi/Tran, I have to say. They have lovely programs, but the consistency doesn’t seem to be improving. I assumed having fewer competitions to skate this season would’ve helped (recalling they did both the junior and senior grand prix events last season, junior worlds long with senior worlds, 4CC, etc). The other interesting teams from Worlds last season seem to be in a rut as well.

(I'll post more later)

 

[burntBREAD]

Uh...I think I will ignore the accusation of being a racist for now just because I don't agree with the judging (surprised this discussion even took on this direction - hopefully it wasn't intentional).

It's not an accusation of being a racist, I doubt evangeline would ever do that. There's only one section that talks about that, did you read the parts before it? Anyways, here's what it said: "Hasty generalization can also be a basis for racist beliefs and prejudices." I promise I'm not trying to sound like an annoying person, but you just made a hasty generalization right there by assuming she was calling you a racist without reading the whole thing...

Definitely COP has its downfalls but humans are humans and until there is some computerized way to judge difficulty and quality (which is what the judges are for), there will always be some gray areas. For example, in tennis, there have been many technological advances like with the instant replay challenge system, but there still are and will be mistakes made by the umpires/judges. If only we were all free of bias...world peace and acceptance wouldn't be such a far-fetched idea. :thumbsup:

Also, I don't know why you keep pointing at Mao's NHK score this season. When you go down the season's best chart...
2. Alissa Czisny, with VERY minimal GOE on jumps (only +1.59) as well as lucky not to get UR on some of her jumps. Total GOE of spins, spirals, and steps was 6.46 (the spiral's GOE alone was more than all her jumps' GOE). For a program that we have all agreed is pretty much devoid of transitions, a PCS TR score of 6.96 (and two 8s in other categories)...where was this located? TEB.
3. Elizaveta Tuktamisheva, opposite of Czisny. Tons of +GOE on jumps (by the way GOE on spins are worth way less than GOE on jumps, straight +3 across the board on a spin only nets +1.5 while straight +3s across the board on a triple jump gains +2.1, on a quadruple jump it gets +3), minimal on spins. Her PCS is much higher than at Skate Canada despite almost the same performance here (lower than Czisny, Kostner, Asada, Suzuki, etc. as IMO it should be at this point, Elizaveta is lacking a bit in SS, TR, and CH, and IN/PE is attached to CH and somewhat SS). Also at TEB.
4. Carolina Kostner: Decent GOE across the board, a few negatives. High PCS, great SS, strong CH/PE/IN (TR lacking a bit too). Actually if you want to know why she got level 1 on two spins in Skate America and level 4s here, definitely message mskater93 and ask. During a JGP I noticed a few people got level 1s for spins/steps that I thought were just fine and I asked and she responded quickly and analyzed the reasons as to why the levels were low. This was at COC.

You can go on and on but you can also find reasons. And to answer another one of your questions, through Alissa and Elizaveta's programs you can see how much non-jump elements can contribute a person's score (IMO spins should be worth more), as with Alissa 80% of her extra points on TES was from non-jumps. I think this is fair, because it shouldn't all be about jumps, but also all the non jump elements as well as SS, TR, etc. (figure skating, originally mostly about tracing figures on the ice).

BTW, I know you definitely have good intentions, but you're coming off a bit...I guess dismissive(?) of others' opinions. They have merit too. Variety is the spice of life, after all.

 

[Mathman]

I think you are making a couple of assumptions...

I guess I misunderstood the point of your previous post. When you said that studies show that athletes don't perform better at home, I though those studies took into account all the things you mention here -- they are more used to the venue, they have or don't have an adrenaline rush, they do or do not like the rowdy crowd, the opposition does or does not rise to the occasion , the cement is harder or softer -- etc. All of these thing affect performance.

If athletes perform just as well at home and away, after taking all these performance-affecting variables into account, yet still the home team wins more than its share, what variable remains?

 

[jcoates]

I guess I misunderstood the point of your previous post. When you said that studies show that athletes don't perform better at home, I though those studies took into account all the things you mention here -- they are more used to the venue, they have or don't have an adrenaline rush, they do or do not like the rowdy crowd, the opposition does or does not rise to the occasion , the cement is harder or softer -- etc. All of these thing affect performance.

If athletes perform just as well at home and away, after taking all these performance-affecting variables into account, yet still the home team wins more than its share, what variable remains?

Mental toughness. The quality of the competitors. How many times has a team from a deeper conference in the NFL but weaker record come through to beat the team from a weaker conference but with a stronger record and home field advantage once the playoffs begin?

 

[Dragonlady]

The hometown bonus is interesting. I'd argue some skaters get a real thrill perfoming at home (Virtue/Moir for example) whereas others find it nervewracking (Weaver/Poje have never had two strong skates on home ice)

Weaver & Poje skated brilliantly in Kitchener at Skate Canada in 2009, winning their first GP medal (bronze) and beating Bobrova & Soloviev for the first time. This truly was "home ice" for Andrew as he trained at the Aud in Kitchener for years. The hometown fans roared for them when they took the ice and the building was electric. W&P fed off that energy and skated with energy and intensity.

 

[Mathman]

Mental toughness. The quality of the competitors. How many times has a team from a deeper conference in the NFL but weaker record come through to beat the team from a weaker conference but with a stronger record and home field advantage once the playoffs begin?

It seems like mental toughness would be one of the factors that affect performance. As for strength of opposition, over the course of many seasons and averaged over all teams, the typical team would play just as many good teams as bad, at home and away, and this would be a statistical wash. Yet still the home team wins 60% of the time.

Anyway, in figure skating the strength of the opposition should not (in principle) affect your score.

So the question still remains: after setting aside all the factors that affect skaters performances, what non-performance factors remain that help to determine their scores?

 

[jcoates]

It seems like mental toughness would be one of the factors that affect performance. As for strength of opposition, over the course of many seasons and averaged over all teams, the typical team would play just as many good teams as bad, at home and away, and this would be a statistical wash. Yet still the home team wins 60% of the time.

Anyway, in figure skating the strength of the opposition should not (in principle) affect your score.

So the question still remains: after setting aside all the factors that affect skaters performances, what non-performance factors remain that help to determine their scores?

Yes, but mental toughness comes from within the competitor and is not a product of the environment. So it does affect performance, but it is one of the few things that is entirely within the control of the athlete.

As to performance across seasons/meetings, you are correct. Of course that ignores the fact the players in team sports change year to year. It also ignores the examples of non-team sports which I mentioned. But that actually negates the argument many are making specific to this upcoming event that it's location in Canada for this one competition will necessarily change the outcome which is what I have been focusing on. There is a difference between a statistical trend over time and an individual outcome.