Comments on: What Explains the “Shocking” European Ryder Cup Win?

By: Todd S

Todd S — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 02:32:46 +0000

Yes, thank you! So many things in sports happen at the rate of random chance, and yet they end up being called “miraculous,” or my pet peeve, “destiny.” And Ken is right, it again came down to a putting contest. It would not be difficult to find two putts that almost stayed out, but went in, or almost went in, but stayed out, and there’s your difference.

By: Nate

Nate — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 20:10:55 +0000

I think the reason why this event qualifies as shocking is that most fans don’t perceive events through a statistical lens, but rather through a narrative one. If one team blows a big lead, then it’s a shock, regardless of the statistical probabilities. After all, improbable or unlikely events are shocking, aren’t they?

I think the human need to put things into a narrative context is often at odds with the a statistical context, and in a contest between the two perspectives the narrative one wins out more often when it comes to how people perceive sports events. Perhaps some room for collaboration between the Economics Dept. and the Humanities here?

By: Ken D.

Ken D. — Fri, 05 Oct 2012 23:47:12 +0000

28 matches. 64 player-rounds. About 1,000 holes. Around 4,000 strokes. The result: 14 1/2 to 13 1/2. It could have been reversed by just two of those 4,000 strokes, dozens of which teetered in or out on the rim of the cup. And that result proves erases any doubt as to which grouping of elite golfers is more elite? Hey, it was a close competition and a fun show; let’s not go nuts.