Jump to content
Head Coach Openings 2024 ×
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $2,716 of $3,600 target

Travel Time and It’s Effect On IHSAA Semi-State Outcomes


Recommended Posts

Will take full responsibility for sidetracking two of the semi state threads leading up to contests this Friday night as travel time and it’s effect on the outcomes of high school football contests, specifically those at the semi-state level became a hot topic.

Not wanting to further detract from those contests, I felt a separate thread was necessary.

It was claimed by one poster (@GOLDRUSH1985) (and even presented as a stone cold fact) that the amount of travel time, specifically bus rides in excess of 2 hours (I’ll let the LA Times article he attempted to cite that stated even a 30 minute bus ride has detrimental effects slide for now) plays a significant role in the outcome of semi-state football contests 

Well, the Temp has run the numbers and the results speak for themselves.

Taking schools that are now closed out of the equation (simply because I don’t want to dig up the data; there are two (Harding and Rockville if I am not mistaken), there have been 218 IHSAA semi-state contests played in the last 20 years.

I feel 20 years is a fair time period to analyze this data and draw a reasonable conclusion.

Of those 218 contests, 102 of them were played within a two-hour drive (according to Google) from one any other.  The road team was 44-58 in those 102 contests for a winning percentage of .431.

Of those 218 contests, 116 of them were played where a bus ride of 2+ hours was required (according to Google).  The road team was 54-62 in those 116 contests for a winning percentage of .466.

So, not only is the idiom of a 2+ hour bus ride DEBUNKED, but teams that travel in excess of two hours actually have had a HIGHER success/win rate than those who traveled less than two hours to play a semi-state contest.

#micdrop

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, temptation said:

So, not only is the idiom of a 2+ hour bus ride DEBUNKED, but teams that travel in excess of two hours actually have had a HIGHER success/win rate than those who traveled less than two hours to play a semi-state contest.

#micdrop

First, let me say great job of data mining. Appreciate the work. Very helpful to this discussion. The numbers are what they are, but they don’t speak for themselves. They have to be interpreted. And you’ve overstated the significance of these numbers in your interpretation, perhaps knowingly for emphasis, in order to make your point.

If what you are trying to do is determine whether a bus ride of 2+ hrs. is a more (or less) significant disadvantage than a shorter ride, simply using won-loss records won’t do that. For example, Team A travels 2 1/2 hrs. to play Team B. On a neutral field, Team B is 10 pts. better than Team A. They play the game, and Team B wins by 21 pts. The next week, Team A travels 15 minutes to play Team C. On a neutral field, Team C is 10 pts. better than Team A. They play the game, and Team C wins by 1 pt.

These data support, but don’t “prove,” that as for Team A, a long bus ride causes them to perform more poorly than a short bus ride, even though they lost both games. Of course, you’d need a lot more outcomes to be able to talk about “proving” something. But the principle is the same. If you want to find out how travel times affect performance, you have to measure the difference between the actual performance after travel compared to the expected performance over travel times. I think this illustration shows how difficult it would be to measure how much travel affects performance, since there are way too many variables involved.

Now it’s about time for someone to talk about “common sense” … which is often neither common nor accurate.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bobref said:

First, let me say great job of data mining. Appreciate the work. Very helpful to this discussion. The numbers are what they are, but they don’t speak for themselves. They have to be interpreted. And you’ve overstated the significance of these numbers in your interpretation, perhaps knowingly for emphasis, in order to make your point.

If what you are trying to do is determine whether a bus ride of 2+ hrs. is a more (or less) significant disadvantage than a shorter ride, simply using won-loss records won’t do that. For example, Team A travels 2 1/2 hrs. to play Team B. On a neutral field, Team B is 10 pts. better than Team A. They play the game, and Team B wins by 21 pts. The next week, Team A travels 15 minutes to play Team C. On a neutral field, Team C is 10 pts. better than Team A. They play the game, and Team C wins by 1 pt.

These data support, but don’t “prove,” that as for Team A, a long bus ride causes them to perform more poorly than a short bus ride, even though they lost both games. Of course, you’d need a lot more outcomes to be able to talk about “proving” something. But the principle is the same. If you want to find out how travel times affect performance, you have to measure the difference between the actual performance after travel compared to the expected performance over travel times. I think this illustration shows how difficult it would be to measure how much travel affects performance, since there are way too many variables involved.

Now it’s about time for someone to talk about “common sense” … which is often neither common nor accurate.

No.  All I am doing is pointing out that it is a non-factor or WAY down the list in determining the outcome.  That has been my point all along.

These numbers bear that out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, temptation said:

Will take full responsibility for sidetracking two of the semi state threads leading up to contests this Friday night as travel time and it’s effect on the outcomes of high school football contests, specifically those at the semi-state level became a hot topic.

Not wanting to further detract from those contests, I felt a separate thread was necessary.

It was claimed by one poster (@GOLDRUSH1985) (and even presented as a stone cold fact) that the amount of travel time, specifically bus rides in excess of 2 hours (I’ll let the LA Times article he attempted to cite that stated even a 30 minute bus ride has detrimental effects slide for now) plays a significant role in the outcome of semi-state football contests 

Well, the Temp has run the numbers and the results speak for themselves.

Taking schools that are now closed out of the equation (simply because I don’t want to dig up the data; there are two (Harding and Rockville if I am not mistaken), there have been 218 IHSAA semi-state contests played in the last 20 years.

I feel 20 years is a fair time period to analyze this data and draw a reasonable conclusion.

Of those 218 contests, 102 of them were played within a two-hour drive (according to Google) from one any other.  The road team was 44-58 in those 102 contests for a winning percentage of .431.

Of those 218 contests, 116 of them were played where a bus ride of 2+ hours was required (according to Google).  The road team was 54-62 in those 116 contests for a winning percentage of .466.

So, not only is the idiom of a 2+ hour bus ride DEBUNKED, but teams that travel in excess of two hours actually have had a HIGHER success/win rate than those who traveled less than two hours to play a semi-state contest.

#micdrop

 

Perhaps that might be the case, but I'm not sure if it's a mic drop just yet. 

Is there data that suggests even spread of team strengths, or adjustments, in the datapoints or at least an analysis of whether that's a factor.  For example, Indy Lutheran travels on the road this week to North Decatur.  Lutheran is just under 90 Sagarin and North Decatur is just under 64.  Lutheran will have roughly a 45-minute trip to North Decatur.  Lutheran could make that trip via Lafayette, over three hours in the misdirection, and still end up with a win.  Or, conversely, North Decatur could make the trip to Lutheran, about 45 minutes, and pretty likely not come away with a win.  Similarly, Valpo's taking a trip to Fort Wayne this weekend to play Snider.  Snider's got a 92+ Sagarin and Valpo's got 78+ Sagarin.  Realistically, Snider could likely head to Valpo, again via Lafayette ... an almost four-hour misdirection ... and still be favored to win whereas Valpo's slightly more than 2 hour trip to Snider is likely to result in a loss.

It may turn out that the datapoints evenly distribute the strength items, so that you can dismiss the distance, but I would not be surprised to see that RELATIVE strength plays a part in the equation that can be amplified by distance traveled. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moved this just now from the other thread:

If we can all agree that the home team has a 1.76 point advantage based on Sagarin's research of 1800 football games, then can we agree that driving two hours might bump that advantage up even if minimal? Let's say it moves that advantage to 3 or even 5. In most cases, the better team ends up winning anyway. But it's hard to deny that isn't, at minimum, a SLIGHT advantage to the home team in this case. Common sense tells me there is an advantage. How big the advantage we'll never know since there is no way of calculating this based on data (unless your Sagarin.).

I think Bobref and Foxbat touched base on my "there is no way of calculating this" comment. Going off of win/loss alone doesn't tell us the entire story. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Bobref said:

First, let me say great job of data mining. Appreciate the work. Very helpful to this discussion. The numbers are what they are, but they don’t speak for themselves. They have to be interpreted. And you’ve overstated the significance of these numbers in your interpretation, perhaps knowingly for emphasis, in order to make your point.

If what you are trying to do is determine whether a bus ride of 2+ hrs. is a more (or less) significant disadvantage than a shorter ride, simply using won-loss records won’t do that. For example, Team A travels 2 1/2 hrs. to play Team B. On a neutral field, Team B is 10 pts. better than Team A. They play the game, and Team B wins by 21 pts. The next week, Team A travels 15 minutes to play Team C. On a neutral field, Team C is 10 pts. better than Team A. They play the game, and Team C wins by 1 pt.

These data support, but don’t “prove,” that as for Team A, a long bus ride causes them to perform more poorly than a short bus ride, even though they lost both games. Of course, you’d need a lot more outcomes to be able to talk about “proving” something. But the principle is the same. If you want to find out how travel times affect performance, you have to measure the difference between the actual performance after travel compared to the expected performance over travel times. I think this illustration shows how difficult it would be to measure how much travel affects performance, since there are way too many variables involved.

Now it’s about time for someone to talk about “common sense” … which is often neither common nor accurate.

Ding Ding Ding we have a winner . Trying to find data to back my statement up would be very difficult . So I tend to listen to the person who knows a sporting team the best , the Head Coach . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yes, thanks for the research on this Temp. Just off the top of my head, I was thinking about some games where the visiting team had to travel 1.5 hours +. 

This year three games came to mind:

Snider at Mishawaka: Snider went down 21-0 then woke up in the second half. 

Carroll at Jeff: Down 20-7, Carroll woke up in the second half.

Cathedral at Penn: Not sure of the exact details, but Penn had Cathedral on the ropes early on before the Irish took over. 

2019: 

Undefeated Homestead at winless Noblesville. Homestead finally woke up in the 4th quarter. The following week, a heavily favored Carmel team traveled to Homestead where the Greyhounds were outplayed for 1.5 quarters before waking up.  

2004: Snider travels to Carmel and goes down 14-0 before taking over and winning 42-21

1995: Snider travels to Carmel and goes down 21-0 before forcing overtime. 

Clearly these examples aren't the end all be all. And no offense to Mishawaka, Jefferson, and Penn for coming out strong in the forementioned games. I'm just making an observation. 

Really need Jeff Sagarin to chime in here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like this whole debate is very subjective. There's a few instance-specific factors (team's familiarity with travel, the smoothness of the trip, the ability to keep regular routine, etc.) that I think could impact the degree in which a long bus trip can affect a team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, temptation said:

Will take full responsibility for sidetracking two of the semi state threads leading up to contests this Friday night as travel time and it’s effect on the outcomes of high school football contests, specifically those at the semi-state level became a hot topic.

Not wanting to further detract from those contests, I felt a separate thread was necessary.

It was claimed by one poster (@GOLDRUSH1985) (and even presented as a stone cold fact) that the amount of travel time, specifically bus rides in excess of 2 hours (I’ll let the LA Times article he attempted to cite that stated even a 30 minute bus ride has detrimental effects slide for now) plays a significant role in the outcome of semi-state football contests 

Well, the Temp has run the numbers and the results speak for themselves.

Taking schools that are now closed out of the equation (simply because I don’t want to dig up the data; there are two (Harding and Rockville if I am not mistaken), there have been 218 IHSAA semi-state contests played in the last 20 years.

I feel 20 years is a fair time period to analyze this data and draw a reasonable conclusion.

Of those 218 contests, 102 of them were played within a two-hour drive (according to Google) from one any other.  The road team was 44-58 in those 102 contests for a winning percentage of .431.

Of those 218 contests, 116 of them were played where a bus ride of 2+ hours was required (according to Google).  The road team was 54-62 in those 116 contests for a winning percentage of .466.

So, not only is the idiom of a 2+ hour bus ride DEBUNKED, but teams that travel in excess of two hours actually have had a HIGHER success/win rate than those who traveled less than two hours to play a semi-state contest.

#micdrop

 

The LA times article I attempted to cite? It's all right there in black and white by the teams coaches . You apparently know more than these teams coaches because you ran a PB time in a marathon with little sleep and long travel times ? Newsflash , not everyone is like you Temp . If a coach says long travel times affect his team , why would you not believe him or her ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MD had a 3 hour bus ride 3 straight weeks last year (reg, SS and state).  Regional they won with a running clock, SS won fairly comfortably.  State, they went up the night before so it was no factor.  Sleeping in a hotel and playing earlier than normal will effect your routine though (but Drayk Bowen was the reason they lost).

2 years ago, they made the long drive to WeBo and got trounced in SS.  This year, another long bus ride to TC and didn't seem like it had much of an effect on them.

I think it boils down to how the coaching staff handles the logistics:  What time do you leave?  Do you stop and stretch on the way?  Charter bus or school bus?  Lots of things to make the drive more tolerable/comfortable for the players.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Wildcat1992 said:

MD had a 3 hour bus ride 3 straight weeks last year (reg, SS and state).  Regional they won with a running clock, SS won fairly comfortably.  State, they went up the night before so it was no factor.  Sleeping in a hotel and playing earlier than normal will effect your routine though (but Drayk Bowen was the reason they lost).

2 years ago, they made the long drive to WeBo and got trounced in SS.  This year, another long bus ride to TC and didn't seem like it had much of an effect on them.

I think it boils down to how the coaching staff handles the logistics:  What time do you leave?  Do you stop and stretch on the way?  Charter bus or school bus?  Lots of things to make the drive more tolerable/comfortable for the players.

Yeah, how many bathroom stops did they have to make?  Those are terrible with groups.  All you need is for those who have to pee to get off the bus and do their business, but inevitably the # of people who now has to pee goes up like 50%, you now have those who want to get off the bus to "stretch their legs", visit the convenience store, vending machines, etc.    All of a sudden it is like herding cats.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

Yeah, how many bathroom stops did they have to make?  Those are terrible with groups.  All you need is for those who have to pee to get off the bus and do their business, but inevitably the # of people who now has to pee goes up like 50%, you now have those who want to get off the bus to "stretch their legs", visit the convenience store, vending machines, etc.    All of a sudden it is like herding cats.

 

Pretty simple.  You stop one time (at a rest stop preferably) to do an organized stretch/jog/etc.  and you tell the players to go to the bathroom and that's it.  No buying junk food, etc.  If an a 15-18 year old can't pee before they leave and then has to go more than once in a 3 hour road trip he's got problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Wildcat1992 said:

Pretty simple.  You stop one time (at a rest stop preferably) to do an organized stretch/jog/etc.  and you tell the players to go to the bathroom and that's it.  No buying junk food, etc.  If an a 15-18 year old can't pee before they leave and then has to go more than once in a 3 hour road trip he's got problems.

It's like the ARMY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GOLDRUSH1985 said:

Ding Ding Ding we have a winner . Trying to find data to back my statement up would be very difficult . So I tend to listen to the person who knows a sporting team the best , the Head Coach . 

TWO head coaches, lol.

Pick up the mic for me.  It’s still on the ground.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, scarab527 said:

I feel like this whole debate is very subjective. There's a few instance-specific factors (team's familiarity with travel, the smoothness of the trip, the ability to keep regular routine, etc.) that I think could impact the degree in which a long bus trip can affect a team. 

It’s extremely subjective but the original claim cannot be proven any more or less so than what the research I’ve done above does.

All I am saying is those winning percentages are damn close…

Edited by temptation
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 years ago we played AT Lawrenceburg (a 3 + hour bus trip) for Regionals - and won 49-28

This year, they came to our place and put it on us, 31-7. 

I don't see the "bus trip" argument holding much water. 

It's only an excuse when/if you need it. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, jets said:

2 years ago we played AT Lawrenceburg (a 3 + hour bus trip) for Regionals - and won 49-28

This year, they came to our place and put it on us, 31-7. 

I don't see the "bus trip" argument holding much water. 

It's only an excuse when/if you need it. 

I gave Bobref 135 examples as to why the home team doesn't have an advantage when traveling across town. He gave me 1800 examples as to why they do. You're going to have to do better than that. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, jets said:

2 years ago we played AT Lawrenceburg (a 3 + hour bus trip) for Regionals - and won 49-28

This year, they came to our place and put it on us, 31-7. 

I don't see the "bus trip" argument holding much water. 

It's only an excuse when/if you need it. 

Second mic drop…especially the final sentence.

This isn’t the NFL where you have teams traveling three time zones.

Edited by temptation
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, temptation said:

You played for five head coaches in four years now?

Just put down the shovel man.

Dude wants to argue a fact that nearly every head coach will concede but can't properly read a post . FYI Tempster , It was 1 head coach in 3 years, Wally was an Assistant coach . And high school used to be 10-12 . 

3 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

At the end of the day it's a Jimmy's and Joe's thing. I could see the home team having the slight advantage if both teams were on equal footing, but at the end of the day a 2 hour bus ride isn't going to negate a night and day talent disparity

Nobody said it would . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...