6 ms·

England to win World Cup, says JPM quant model

19 points by nsoonhui 16y ago

joubert 16y ago
My money is on Nate Silver's prediction of Brazil winning, with Spain in 2nd and England 3rd. Full rankings (updated periodically): http://soccernet.espn.go.com/spi/rankings/_/view/worldcup?cc=5901&ver=us http://soccernet.espn.go.com/spi/rankings/_/view/worldcup?cc... Methodology: http://soccernet.espn.go.com/world-cup/story/_/id/4447078/ce/us/guide-espn-spi-ratings?cc=5901&ver=us http://soccernet.espn.go.com/world-cup/story/_/id/4447078/ce...
- zzygan 16y ago
  I think rankings in general are pretty useless overall. Every single World Cup in the past has turned up surprises in the weirdest kind of way. My opinion is Spain 1st, Brazil 2nd, Ivory Coast 3rd
javanix 16y ago
Mortgage-backed securities to stay profitable, says Merill-Lynch quant model.
tokenadult 16y ago
A fascinating book to read as the World Cup nears: http://www.amazon.com/Soccernomics-Australia-Turkey-Iraq-Are-Destined/dp/1568584253 http://www.amazon.com/Soccernomics-Australia-Turkey-Iraq-Are...
steveplace 16y ago
"Black swans" occur quite often in sports, so statistical modeling only goes so far. One torn ACL is all it takes and it can change models around.
rglullis 16y ago
Every world cup we see predictions like that. Every world cup these predictions are wrong. The beautiful thing about football (and maybe the reason it is not that popular in the US) is that stats don't matter nearly as much as they do in baseball, american football and basketball.
- megablast 16y ago
  I am not sure that it is stats that make most other sports more popular than Soccer, in countries like Canada, USA, Australia, New Zealand. For some reason, soccer nations seem to enjoy the fact that any team can win any game, due to the nature of the game. It is such a low scoring game, that one goal can decide the game. So all it takes is an incredibly lucky kick, or cheat, for a side to win. You don't see this in many other sports. So while the Premier league the result is certain (either Chelsea or Man United), the World cup, where in the later stages one game decides whether you move on or not, anyone has a chance.
  - _sh 16y ago
    But this also means, from a supporter's perspective, that football is unsatisfying because there is a dearth of scoring (one lucky kick undoes 90 minutes of effort from the opposition), and this does not reflect the nature of the match. Also, draws are common, even when there is a clear imbalance between the skill/ability of the teams. I've heard it concluded that the reason football fans are seen to be more 'thuggish' (media hype aside) is that the game often does not satisfy the primal urge to defeat someone/something. True, the 'one lucky kick' possibility also means that your team wins when it really shouldn't have. Is this really satisfying to a supporter? (I've also heard it concluded that the glut of scoring makes basketball less appealing for similar reasons, but I haven't followed it enough to determine whether this is true).
    - hitonagashi 16y ago
      It is attracting precisely because of the chance of a lucky kick. You can very rarely turn off when winning, especially when good teams play each other, because there can always be a moment of magic to tie the game. It means as a supporter, you are always on the edge of your seat, cheering your team on, because you know what can happen if they falter. It also means that the rare occasions where you are 3-4 0 up and the game is safe are just that much more satisfying ;).
    - zzygan 16y ago
      I'm a huge football fan (Barcelona FWIW), so take what you will from the following comment. I watch way too many European games on late night cable, and the low scoring complaint is kind of a fallacy when you watch most games in Europe. This season just gone, i think the average goals per game in England this year was about 2.5. Sure this average has an upward trend by games like a 7-0 thrashing that Chelsea dished out in the last game of the season. The German league has an even higher average goals per game (cant seem to find that stat at the moment..) There are low scoring games, but that is part of the way the game works, but I definitely would not say a low score is a regular thing week in week out anymore. As to the hooligans that truly are complete idiots, there is no other explanation for their behavior other than stupidity. Its a gang mentality that causes the problem, not the game itself. There are some epic rivalries in Europe where the fans do really hate each other, and it goes back to an identity/gang thought pattern.
nir 16y ago
Readers from non-soccer nations: every 4 years there's a soccer world cup. A few months before every soccer world cup, UK media is abuzz with predictions that, this time, England will really go all the way. In the world cup itself, the English barely manages to graduate the group stage when, bruised and battered, it meets a Latin American or stronger European team that promptly wipes the floor with them in the next round. A band of heros only few weeks ago, they then return to England to have the UK tabloids wipe the floor with them once again. That's a soccer tradition many of us look forward to seeing again next month, in South Africa.
- Lewisham 16y ago
  You have to believe! Like that sticker from an earlier World Cup says: "Pride. Passion. Belief." Don't be so pessimistic!
  - nir 16y ago
    Pessimistic? I'm looking forward to it :)
- megablast 16y ago
  England has great players, possibly the strongest side altogether. However, they never manage to play together as a team, unlike a lot of other countries. This result is good news, now I don't have to watch any of the world cup. Rather watch sports where cheating is not such an integral part of the game, and where the officiating body actually tried to discourage it rather than encourage. (from a bitter aussie)
  - zppx 16y ago
    Spain had the biggest number of players on last year best player in the world election, I'm brazilian but I think Spain or the Netherlands will win im Africa
  - patrickk 16y ago
    Last World Cup England's "great players" like Frank Lampard and Stevie Gerrard never turned up. Their only consistently good players in that tournament were a guy who used to ply his trade in Germany (Owen Hargreaves) and Wayne Rooney of course (yes I'm a Man Utd. fan). Manchester United bought Hargreaves as a result of that showing. The media has hyped a lot of England's "stars" into the stratosphere so that a lot of people believe the rubbish that's published about them. Every time the World Cup rolls around all England have to do is show up and they'll win it. And when they don't it's the end of the world. Just cos you invented the sport, doesn't mean you have a divine right to win it! In Europe, I would admire the likes of Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands a lot more than England as they have a lot of fine, natural footballers (not to mention they generally play better as a unit) and I'd suspect one or two of the should reach the semis at least. ps. I hope France get annihilated in the group stages. Yes, I'm Irish. Those rotten cheaters should never have been permitted to get on a plane to South Africa. Even if you're French you shouldn't support your own country. C'mon Mexico!
johnrob 16y ago
There's not nearly enough data to make decent conclusions about national teams. They don't play often enough, and when they do the rosters are never the same. To make a decent prediction you have to use the final roster (submitted to FIFA) and factor in each player's condition.
JangoSteve 16y ago
There was actually an analysis done a while back of the outcomes of every game in the last world-cup that showed statistically just how unpredictable soccer games are. The punchline is that soccer is very unpredictable, especially given the bracket setup of the World Cup. I can't seem to track down the article now, but I sort of remember the logic... If Team A beats Team B, then Team B beats Team C, then Team C beats Team A, then you've demonstrated at least a 33% probability of a fluke outcome in the soccer bracket. This is highly simplified of course, but repeat this analysis over a much larger sample size, and you get some pretty convincing results (and I really wish I could find that paper now).
SkyMarshal 16y ago
These guys predict Brazil vs Serbia in the final, w/ Brazil winning. Based on GDP, population, & other demographics. http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/infographical-morsels-7/ http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/infographical-mor...

19 points by nsoonhui 16y ago

My money is on Nate Silver's prediction of Brazil winning, with Spain in 2nd and England 3rd. Full rankings (updated periodically): http://soccernet.espn.go.com/spi/rankings/_/view/worldcup?cc=5901&ver=us http://soccernet.espn.go.com/spi/rankings/_/view/worldcup?cc... Methodology: http://soccernet.espn.go.com/world-cup/story/_/id/4447078/ce/us/guide-espn-spi-ratings?cc=5901&ver=us http://soccernet.espn.go.com/world-cup/story/_/id/4447078/ce...

zzygan 16y ago
I think rankings in general are pretty useless overall. Every single World Cup in the past has turned up surprises in the weirdest kind of way. My opinion is Spain 1st, Brazil 2nd, Ivory Coast 3rd

javanix 16y ago

Mortgage-backed securities to stay profitable, says Merill-Lynch quant model.

tokenadult 16y ago

A fascinating book to read as the World Cup nears: http://www.amazon.com/Soccernomics-Australia-Turkey-Iraq-Are-Destined/dp/1568584253 http://www.amazon.com/Soccernomics-Australia-Turkey-Iraq-Are...

steveplace 16y ago

"Black swans" occur quite often in sports, so statistical modeling only goes so far. One torn ACL is all it takes and it can change models around.

rglullis 16y ago

Every world cup we see predictions like that. Every world cup these predictions are wrong. The beautiful thing about football (and maybe the reason it is not that popular in the US) is that stats don't matter nearly as much as they do in baseball, american football and basketball.

megablast 16y ago
I am not sure that it is stats that make most other sports more popular than Soccer, in countries like Canada, USA, Australia, New Zealand. For some reason, soccer nations seem to enjoy the fact that any team can win any game, due to the nature of the game. It is such a low scoring game, that one goal can decide the game. So all it takes is an incredibly lucky kick, or cheat, for a side to win. You don't see this in many other sports. So while the Premier league the result is certain (either Chelsea or Man United), the World cup, where in the later stages one game decides whether you move on or not, anyone has a chance.
- _sh 16y ago
  But this also means, from a supporter's perspective, that football is unsatisfying because there is a dearth of scoring (one lucky kick undoes 90 minutes of effort from the opposition), and this does not reflect the nature of the match. Also, draws are common, even when there is a clear imbalance between the skill/ability of the teams. I've heard it concluded that the reason football fans are seen to be more 'thuggish' (media hype aside) is that the game often does not satisfy the primal urge to defeat someone/something. True, the 'one lucky kick' possibility also means that your team wins when it really shouldn't have. Is this really satisfying to a supporter? (I've also heard it concluded that the glut of scoring makes basketball less appealing for similar reasons, but I haven't followed it enough to determine whether this is true).
  - hitonagashi 16y ago
    It is attracting precisely because of the chance of a lucky kick. You can very rarely turn off when winning, especially when good teams play each other, because there can always be a moment of magic to tie the game. It means as a supporter, you are always on the edge of your seat, cheering your team on, because you know what can happen if they falter. It also means that the rare occasions where you are 3-4 0 up and the game is safe are just that much more satisfying ;).
  - zzygan 16y ago
    I'm a huge football fan (Barcelona FWIW), so take what you will from the following comment. I watch way too many European games on late night cable, and the low scoring complaint is kind of a fallacy when you watch most games in Europe. This season just gone, i think the average goals per game in England this year was about 2.5. Sure this average has an upward trend by games like a 7-0 thrashing that Chelsea dished out in the last game of the season. The German league has an even higher average goals per game (cant seem to find that stat at the moment..) There are low scoring games, but that is part of the way the game works, but I definitely would not say a low score is a regular thing week in week out anymore. As to the hooligans that truly are complete idiots, there is no other explanation for their behavior other than stupidity. Its a gang mentality that causes the problem, not the game itself. There are some epic rivalries in Europe where the fans do really hate each other, and it goes back to an identity/gang thought pattern.

nir 16y ago

Readers from non-soccer nations: every 4 years there's a soccer world cup. A few months before every soccer world cup, UK media is abuzz with predictions that, this time, England will really go all the way. In the world cup itself, the English barely manages to graduate the group stage when, bruised and battered, it meets a Latin American or stronger European team that promptly wipes the floor with them in the next round. A band of heros only few weeks ago, they then return to England to have the UK tabloids wipe the floor with them once again. That's a soccer tradition many of us look forward to seeing again next month, in South Africa.

Lewisham 16y ago
You have to believe! Like that sticker from an earlier World Cup says: "Pride. Passion. Belief." Don't be so pessimistic!
- nir 16y ago
  Pessimistic? I'm looking forward to it :)
megablast 16y ago
England has great players, possibly the strongest side altogether. However, they never manage to play together as a team, unlike a lot of other countries. This result is good news, now I don't have to watch any of the world cup. Rather watch sports where cheating is not such an integral part of the game, and where the officiating body actually tried to discourage it rather than encourage. (from a bitter aussie)
- zppx 16y ago
  Spain had the biggest number of players on last year best player in the world election, I'm brazilian but I think Spain or the Netherlands will win im Africa
- patrickk 16y ago
  Last World Cup England's "great players" like Frank Lampard and Stevie Gerrard never turned up. Their only consistently good players in that tournament were a guy who used to ply his trade in Germany (Owen Hargreaves) and Wayne Rooney of course (yes I'm a Man Utd. fan). Manchester United bought Hargreaves as a result of that showing. The media has hyped a lot of England's "stars" into the stratosphere so that a lot of people believe the rubbish that's published about them. Every time the World Cup rolls around all England have to do is show up and they'll win it. And when they don't it's the end of the world. Just cos you invented the sport, doesn't mean you have a divine right to win it! In Europe, I would admire the likes of Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands a lot more than England as they have a lot of fine, natural footballers (not to mention they generally play better as a unit) and I'd suspect one or two of the should reach the semis at least. ps. I hope France get annihilated in the group stages. Yes, I'm Irish. Those rotten cheaters should never have been permitted to get on a plane to South Africa. Even if you're French you shouldn't support your own country. C'mon Mexico!

johnrob 16y ago

There's not nearly enough data to make decent conclusions about national teams. They don't play often enough, and when they do the rosters are never the same. To make a decent prediction you have to use the final roster (submitted to FIFA) and factor in each player's condition.

JangoSteve 16y ago

There was actually an analysis done a while back of the outcomes of every game in the last world-cup that showed statistically just how unpredictable soccer games are. The punchline is that soccer is very unpredictable, especially given the bracket setup of the World Cup. I can't seem to track down the article now, but I sort of remember the logic... If Team A beats Team B, then Team B beats Team C, then Team C beats Team A, then you've demonstrated at least a 33% probability of a fluke outcome in the soccer bracket. This is highly simplified of course, but repeat this analysis over a much larger sample size, and you get some pretty convincing results (and I really wish I could find that paper now).

SkyMarshal 16y ago

These guys predict Brazil vs Serbia in the final, w/ Brazil winning. Based on GDP, population, & other demographics. http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/infographical-morsels-7/ http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/infographical-mor...