6 Day Breaks...

[The Finger]

Don't recall saying that it had no impact, but as you usual you disingenuously exaggerate the supposed effect for your own purposes.

02/10/2010: Collingwood 16.12
St Kilda 7.10

Why does the side that finishes higher get the Friday prelim final?

 

[Stax on the mill]

Why does the side that finishes higher get the Friday prelim final?

You tell me. You've got a theory for everything. Let me guess though. Is it to ensure that the Pies get the maximum advantage?

01/10/2010 Pies 16.12 Saints 7.10

 

[manicmagpie]

Cool! A few more questions if you wouldn't mind - what's the sample size; how does this compare across the league; what's the Collingwood figures for teams played; how does all this compare to samples of continuous 6-day breaks for teams in both for and against situations?

Sample size:
Overall: 132 games each
6 Day Breaks: Collingwood 41, St Kilda 45, Geelong 36 (FYI St Kilda, Essendon and Adelaide are the only teams in the comp with more 6 day breaks than Collingwood)
Interstate: Collingwood 24, St Kilda 33, Geelong 31
6 Day & Interstate: Collingwood 10, St Kilda 12, Geelong 9

The stats for all teams show less than a 1% drop in winning rates on a 6 day break. For Vic teams there is a 7% drop when travelling, and a 4% increase in the week after travelling.

There is nothing to suggest that having a six day break makes any difference to your chances of winning, nor does travelling the week before. The stats for travelling are divided neatly into 5 teams not effected or improving interstate and 5 that seemingly sh*t themselves everytime they step on a plane. When even Richmond can boast a better record interstate than in Vic I don't think travel is the big bad some make it out to be.

As to who Collingwood has played off a six day break the figures are as follows:

5 x Carlton & Essendon, 4 x St Kilda, North, Port & Freo, 3 x WC & Hawthorn, 2 x Bris, Richmond & Bulldogs, 1 x Melbourne, Geelong & Adelaide. Everyone but Sydney and GC are represented here. The win rates off a six day break are all very similar to the overall rates (within one win either way) except probably for North (we do worse off a 6 day break) and Hawthorn (we do better). Against Adelaide and Geelong there is too small a sample size to make any comparison.

I say it again, it's nothing more than an excuse used by weak teams. There is only one factor in the draw that actually makes a big difference and that is what teams you play twice. But if you believe some of the people on this site (and in this thread in particular), playing Gold Coast off a 6 day break is more difficult than playing West Coast off a 7 day break. Insanity.

 

[aussierulesrules]

I say it again, it's nothing more than an excuse used by weak teams.

Oh, you say it again, well in that case it must be true. What was anyone else (including those involved at club level) thinking suggesting otherwise?

But if you believe some of the people on this site (and in this thread in particular), playing Gold Coast off a 6 day break is more difficult than playing West Coast off a 7 day break. Insanity.

I think the insanity is on your part if you reckon anyone believes that to be true. Good story though.

 

[Plugger35]

Oh - so that's the only reason Carlton have beaten us twice this season. Cool. Here was I thinking they actually outplayed us!

Amazing that no Collingwood poster identified thie correct reason - that seems to be a Saints supporters speciality. At least there's one Saints supporte here that sees through this.

I doubt he is a real Saints supporter, more than likely an alias of a Collingwood supporter.

Only Collingwood supporters seem to think they don't get an advantage with the fixture due to less travel and less 6 day breaks than other teams.

 

[manicmagpie]

Oh, you say it again, well in that case it must be true. What was anyone else (including those involved at club level) thinking suggesting otherwise?

I think the insanity is on your part if you reckon anyone believes that to be true. Good story though.

And yet there appears to be an endless stream of Saints supporters on this site that reckon Collingwood (playing WC, Haw, Carl, Ess & Geel twice) have an easier fixture than St Kilda (playing GC, Melb, WB, Carl & Syd twice) on the basis that we have less 6 day breaks than them. Despite the fact that since we've had a decent team in the last 6 completed years, we've had the fourth most 6 day breaks, and it's had no effect whatsoever on our winning %.

And also according to the same Saints fans, apparently our fixture would be so much more difficult if only we played Gold Coast, Port or Freo away (the only teams we don't play interstate) instead of one of the teams we play twice.

Still, you've got to hand it to Saints fans. When I first saw our fixture for this year I thought, "Hmm, we travel the exact amount of times we would under a random draw, we play the hardest team in each city, we travel every second week in the lead up to the finals, plus we have literally the hardest set of teams to play twice that has probably ever been handed out. I'm not sure there's anything for supporters of other teams to whinge about here." But it appears I really underestimated Saints fans.

 

[KrakFiend]

And yet there appears to be an endless stream of Saints supporters on this site that reckon Collingwood (playing WC, Haw, Carl, Ess & Geel twice) have an easier fixture than St Kilda (playing GC, Melb, WB, Carl & Syd twice) on the basis that we have less 6 day breaks than them. Despite the fact that since we've had a decent team in the last 6 completed years, we've had the fourth most 6 day breaks, and it's had no effect whatsoever on our winning %.

And also according to the same Saints fans, apparently our fixture would be so much more difficult if only we played Gold Coast, Port or Freo away (the only teams we don't play interstate) instead of one of the teams we play twice.

Still, you've got to hand it to Saints fans. When I first saw our fixture for this year I thought, "Hmm, we travel the exact amount of times we would under a random draw, we play the hardest team in each city, we travel every second week in the lead up to the finals, plus we have literally the hardest set of teams to play twice that has probably ever been handed out. I'm not sure there's anything for supporters of other teams to whinge about here." But it appears I really underestimated Saints fans.

Just book mark this post and quote it whenever some victim poster gets on their high horse.

 

[kosifantutti]

01/10/2010 Pies 16.12 Saints 7.10

I don't know why you keep quoting that score in this thread. I may be wrong but I think both teams had a seven day break and neither had to travel.

 

[Stax on the mill]

I don't know why you keep quoting that score in this thread. I may be wrong but I think both teams had a seven day break and neither had to travel.

Take your point about the 7 day break. GF scores only get quoted in response to infantile posts from The Finger/Hump17, just to keep reminding him where his actual loyalties lie. He seemed to develop a bit of a split personality and identity crisis around 02/10/2010. This is therapy by way of constant re-inforcement.

Hopefully it helps him, but it may take time. Perhaps all posters could assist by including the same scoreline in response to any posts from The Finger/Hump17? It would hasten the re habilitation process for him. Wouldn't bother doing it to genuine, reasonable Saints supporters.

Other posters needn't bother posting scorelines of losing Collingwood Grand Finals, of which alas I don't need reminding.

 

[Monkey King]

I say it again, it's nothing more than an excuse used by weak teams.

Thanks for your reply and the effort you went to in answering my questions. Much appreciated to have those figures. Yes, it does look according to that as though the 6-day break doesn't have as much impact on winning as a lot of people, including myself, tend to think.

In regards to this part of your post though, you could say the same about travel. Ultimately you have to win anywhere and accounting for it is just an excuse used by weaker teams. I don't agree, as better teams will be less affected. In this case, a team of fit 100 gamers is going to deal with a 6-day break a hell of a lot better than a team stacked with still-green and easily fatigued youngsters. It would be interesting to gauge 6-day break results off the win-loss records of the time.

 

[StevenwellerHFC]

Nothin' wrong with them, i love them.

 

[manicmagpie]

Thanks for your reply and the effort you went to in answering my questions. Much appreciated to have those figures. Yes, it does look according to that as though the 6-day break doesn't have as much impact on winning as a lot of people, including myself, tend to think.

In regards to this part of your post though, you could say the same about travel. Ultimately you have to win anywhere and accounting for it is just an excuse used by weaker teams. I don't agree, as better teams will be less affected. In this case, a team of fit 100 gamers is going to deal with a 6-day break a hell of a lot better than a team stacked with still-green and easily fatigued youngsters. It would be interesting to gauge 6-day break results off the win-loss records of the time.

Cheers, mate.

I agree that you stand a better chance of lessening the effects of travel etc if you have an experienced, and above all, a good team. Essentially it is my contention that good teams are not, and should not be, effected by these factors.

 

[Fadge]

Kangas only had a six day break tonight. Who would have thought?

 

[StevenwellerHFC]

Kangas only had a six day break tonight. Who would have thought?

Was a good game.

 

[KrakFiend]

Kangas only had a six day break tonight. Who would have thought?

Yeah but Carlton had 7. We all know that 6 day breaks are an advantage, I think? I don't know, I lose track sometimes. I had this wild thought that such things are often brought up as an advantage if it suits the person, based on who they support/anti-Collingwood supporters aka St Kilda sooks? Wild thought, I'm probably not giving my fellow AFL supporters enough credit there.

 

[Fadge]

Yeah but Carlton had 7. We all know that 6 day breaks are an advantage, I think? I don't know, I lose track sometimes. I had this wild thought that such things are often brought up as an advantage if it suits the person, based on who they support/anti-Collingwood supporters aka St Kilda sooks? Wild thought, I'm probably not giving my fellow AFL supporters enough credit there.

In this case it enabled North Melbourne to continue their good form since pushing one of the best teams in the competition right to the wire, whilst the extra day break to Carlton meant that all of the momentum they had from last week was lost.