[OOT] July 29th Pre-Play In Day 2

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Huh. Jets and Canucks take the standing together thing a step further by doing it in a circle. Not sure if anyone else has done that.

[AC]

Pionk with 2 brutal turnovers to start the game. Gotta exploit that defence!

Hoping Ferland lights up a Jet or 2 in this game.

[dino7c]

Jets turning the puck over left and right...hope it continues

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

The heck? Olli Juolevi is in this game. The Jets might actually not have the worst defenseman on the ice.

[timbit]

Game one in the best of five has to be a must win. Otherwise, you have to win 3 of the last 4 games.
I would bet that 85-90 % of the teams that win the first game....win the series.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

I would bet that whatever the stats are for the teams that win game 1 will be more or less the same as the stats for teams that win game 2 or 3.

Anyway, after a bad first shift, the Jets look to be in game shape, unfortunately. They're skating well.

[EVERLAST]

Nucks transition out of their zone much better than the flames . Boy we have to be better .
Nucks forwards backcheck hard and so their D has allot of time to be involved in the offense.

[activeStick]

Hellebuyck looks good. May not bode well for our offensively challenged boys.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

1-0 Jets, somewhat against the flow of play, but every time the Jets have had zone time with possession they have looked dangerous. Going to need to make clean zone exits.

So far the big takeaway here is that if you can put enough forecheck pressure on the Jets they'll make quick decisions really poorly. Flames need to take notes.

[activeStick]

Originally Posted by timbit

Game one in the best of five has to be a must win. Otherwise, you have to win 3 of the last 4 games.
I would bet that 85-90 % of the teams that win the first game....win the series.

Yup. Already the case in a 7 game series that the team that wins Game 1 wins the series the majority of the time. Shouldn't be a surprise nor a risky bet that the team that wins game 1 in a five game series is going to be incredibly hard to beat.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by activeStick

Yup. Already the case in a 7 game series that the team that wins Game 1 wins the series the majority of the time. Shouldn't be a surprise nor a risky bet that the team that wins game 1 in a five game series is going to be incredibly hard to beat.

Well you better win game 2 if you lose game one

Tied vs. brink of elimination

[browna]

If people here were using the Flames first period as some sort of harbinger for a short series vs the supposedly almighty Jets, watching the same first period of this game should quell some of that worry for all but the chicken littlers.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by activeStick

Yup. Already the case in a 7 game series that the team that wins Game 1 wins the series the majority of the time.

This is actually a fallacy.

https://www.sentex.ca/~ajy/hockey/firstgame.html

[dino7c]

Flames will dominate the play... doesn't mean they will win. They gotta make sure they get traffic to the net

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

This is actually a fallacy.



https://www.sentex.ca/~ajy/hockey/firstgame.html

I don't get it. 64% is "the majority of the time," no?

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Yes. But it's got nothing to do with winning the first game. It has to do with the fact that you won a game. The same is true of winning the second game, or the third, or the fourth. In each case, you have fewer games left to win before winning the series. There is no extra benefit beyond that. So the emphasis that commentators place on winning the first game, as opposed to any of the other games, is based on a misunderstanding of probabilities.

That is a pretty old article, but others have been done since and the same results persist.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Flames won the first game against Colorado.

So ... there is that.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

This is actually a fallacy.

https://www.sentex.ca/~ajy/hockey/firstgame.html

Might be the most stupid statistical analysis I have ever seen.


“As we calculated above, the "ideal" probability that a team that wins the first game of a series will win the rest of the series is 65.625%. Since these two numbers are quite close, So, in conclusion, there is no psychological advantage to winning the first game of a best-of-seven series. There appears to be no advantage to winning the first game than the fact that a team that wins the first game now only needs to win three more, instead of four. Also, the winner of the first game is only a moderately good predictor (i.e. less than 64%) of who is going to win the series. A much better predictor would be the winner of the last game of the series.”

In a best of five it will be higher than 65%, if you win the first game.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Flames won the first game against Colorado.

So ... there is that.

True. Not as easy in a best of five series.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Yes... obviously. But first, the comment I was responding to was about the first game in a seven game series. Second, the question isn't whether you're going to win more than 65% of the time by winning the first game of the series, but whether winning the first game gives you a better chance of winning the series than you would have if the results of games were completely random. If the answer is "no", as that article establishes was the case for the 7 game series he reviewed, then there is nothing special about winning the first game, as opposed to any other game.