PDA

View Full Version : sound



dabum1
09-16-2006, 10:41 PM
do you know of any study done on the effects, if any, of noise (decibels) from the fans/crowd on the players?

LouGehrig
09-17-2006, 12:48 PM
Why not just investigate the effects of different sound levels on the ability to concentrate?

SABR Matt
09-17-2006, 01:03 PM
No study has been done that I'm aware of...mostly because it would be difficult to get accurate sound measurments of enough game situations in enough different parks with enough different players...and even if you could...it would be difficult to quantify exactly how the differing sound levels impacted the players (there'd be a lot of confounding variables...notably that if the sound level is high, either (a) the team that is batting is the home team and therefore there's a rally in progress, which makes it more likely that a positive outcome will occur or (b) it's close and late, which makes it more likely that a good pitcher from the other team is on the mound.)

Interesting question...kind of hard to wrap one's brain around how to answer it.

LouGehrig
09-17-2006, 02:53 PM
But this is the purpose of valid research studies. To what extent do the results of a particular study apply to related situations? Or, what are the limits of a specific study?

There have been studies that investigate the effect of noise levels on concentration ability.

Tango Tiger
09-17-2006, 04:19 PM
I looked once at the effect of the size of the crowd, for each team, against winning the game. I didn't find any.

Williamsburg2599
09-17-2006, 04:22 PM
I just thought of a question like this a few minutes ago, any link that can shows the home/away splits of every major league game ever combined? It be interesting to see how much of a Home Field Advantage there is in baseball...

SABR Matt
09-17-2006, 05:53 PM
Historically...home teams win about 54% of the time. retrosheet's gamelogs reveal this.

Williamsburg2599
09-17-2006, 06:28 PM
Historically...home teams win about 54% of the time. retrosheet's gamelogs reveal this.
Thanks.
Interesting... do you know how this is compared to other sports, such as college football, where HFA is widely praised when a team wins? But then again, every football field is basically the same, so the reason why theres a 4% gap may be because of the fact that the Home team knows how to play the park better than the away team...

SABR Matt
09-17-2006, 06:40 PM
I haven't got any specific information on how important HFA is in other sports because in most other sports, the fans don't care about history or about educating themselves as to the ins and outs of the sport...baseball is unique in that way...as a result there are no major efforts to gather and digitize historical data in the other sports the way there is with baseball.

dabum1
09-17-2006, 09:39 PM
Why not just investigate the effects of different sound levels on the ability to concentrate?

i thought about that, but i couldn't figure who your population would be.

would you just try to look at the average person?

i'd assume that if you picked people at random and looked at their ability to perform under "quiet" and "loud" conditions, that you'd find that people working in quieter conditions would work better.

but baseball players aren't average people. i'm wondering if they are used to all the crowds by now since they get put through it nearly everyday

SABR Matt
09-17-2006, 10:09 PM
Baseball players (especially pitchers) start to succeed in the majors when they figure out how to tune out the background noise almost completely. I know it was just hollywood fun, but the movie "For Love of the Game" shows several moments where the pitcher (the hero of the story) recites a mantra ("Clear the Mechanism") and forces the crowd noise out of his head. I believe this to be a semi-accurate interpretation for what good atheletes can do to focus in difficult circumstances.

Tango Tiger
09-18-2006, 07:35 AM
...the Home team knows how to play the park better than the away team...

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/true_talent_levels_for_sports_leagues/

Please see my comment here:
— tangotiger, 08/24 @ 03:14 PM

And it'll make more sense within the context of the thread.

SABR Matt
09-18-2006, 08:18 AM
Personally...I think it's way high in basketball because the refs are crooked. At least partially.

Tango Tiger
09-18-2006, 08:34 AM
Read my comment in my link. One of the important reasons is because of the number of possessions in a game.

SABR Matt
09-18-2006, 08:37 AM
I did read your comment...I'm not sure the number of possessions is making as much of a difference as all that...I mean I understand the point, but how is it that having multiple possessions causes a "piling on" effect?

Tango Tiger
09-18-2006, 08:42 AM
Imagine for each possession, the home team scores 51% of the time, and the road team scores 49% of the time.

If the game was 20 possessions, how often would the home team win? If the game was 200 possessions, how often would the home team win? (You statistics guys out there can run the numbers here.) The answer is that in a 20-possession game, the home team has a lesser chance of winning than in a 200-possession game.

It's the same logic that the true better team has a better chance of winnings in a best-of-nine than in a best-of-three.

SABR Matt
09-18-2006, 08:53 AM
Ah...Ok that makes sense...(sorry I was a tad dense there)

so...if baseball were only 3 innnigs instead of 9, the home team would probably have less than a .540 W% then...

Tango Tiger
09-18-2006, 09:20 AM
Absolutely. In fact, we can answer that question quite definitively:

If MLB was only three innings (or similarly, started the 7th inning, tied), the win probability would be: .526
http://www.tangotiger.net/innwin3.html

Or possibly: .517
http://www.tangotiger.net/innwin2.html

***

The difference between the two is that the first one assumes that the pitcher quality is constant throughout the game, while the second one is based on actual data.

SABR Matt
09-18-2006, 09:24 AM
the first one is probably closer beacuse if it were a three-inning game, both teams would always use their best pitchers available and pitching talent would be uniformly deep. :)

LouGehrig
09-18-2006, 12:37 PM
i thought about that, but i couldn't figure who your population would be.

would you just try to look at the average person?

i'd assume that if you picked people at random and looked at their ability to perform under "quiet" and "loud" conditions, that you'd find that people working in quieter conditions would work better.

but baseball players aren't average people. i'm wondering if they are used to all the crowds by now since they get put through it nearly everyday

Various samples could be used. Numerous approaches could be used. Remember how loud the Metrodome was during the 1987 and 1991 WS? They recorded the decibel levels for both Series.

Studies could be designed using samples consisting of individuals with great, moderate, and poor athletic abilities, samples based on varying intelligence levels, etc.