OOTP6 needs home field advantage in it

Eugene Church · 12-19-2003, 12:50 PM

Since OOTP6 is being created right now, I want to get in another request for Home field advantage.

I hope OOTP6 will incorporate a home field advantage, since there definitely is one in baseball.

A very quick check of this past season shows 27 of 30 teams played better at home...only Toronto, KC and Milwaukee played better on the road. 7 teams played much better at home than away...Chisox, Chicubs, Oakland, Anaheim, Florida, Philadelphia, Houston, and St. Louis.

Home teams averaged 44.5 wins out of 81 games at home and 36.5 wins out of 81 on the road...Home team won 55% of the time...and the fact that 27 of 30 teams do better at home is overwhelming.

There is a great thread about this. I'll try to get it and post it here.

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...e&pagenumber=2

Le Grande Orange did this excellent research:

This first chart takes a look at each team's home and away record for the season, and makes a simple count of whether the team did better at home, better away, or was the same at both. The numbers cover the period from 1901 to 2002:

National League 82.93%
American League 83.33%
TOTAL 83.13%--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, as you can see, slightly over 83% of the major league teams have finished the season with a better home winning percentage than road winning percentage. That's more that 4 out of 5 teams, covering 102 seasons.

Another chart in the thread shows the home team won 55% of the time.

Hope there's a way to incorporate this into OOTP6.

Gastric ReFlux · 12-19-2003, 01:22 PM

I agree. I tend to think it could be implemented simply enough by giving all players a small bonus when playing at home and a small drop when playing on the road.

draven085 · 12-19-2003, 01:28 PM

Agreed. I would love to see this in OOTP6.

Eugene Church · 12-19-2003, 01:59 PM

Draven: Did you agree with me or Gastric?

draven085 · 12-19-2003, 02:29 PM

Both, actually. I think home field advantage is something that is missing from most sports games. I'd love to see it make it's way into OOTP. I think Gassy's way of handling it would work out nicely.

Kemp · 12-23-2003, 08:14 AM

I think we need to be a little careful here. I think that SOME (but not all) of the home field advantage you might be seeing here is simply teams taking advantage of their own home ballpark effects. That is, tailoring their team to their environment. In that case, no "bonus" would be needed as owners will simply derive that advantage themselves.

However, I do agree that there is MORE to home field advantage than JUST park factors.

I'd caution against giving players too large of a "bonus". So instead of making players 5% better at home (to recreate the 55% home winning percentage) maybe 2% would be more realistic (just making numbers up as an example).

Skipaway · 12-23-2003, 09:08 AM

I think it might be a huge mistake to give the home team players any advantage.

Perhaps you guys forget that the team hit in the last half inning already got an advantage. They know exactly how many runs they need and could adjust the strategies better. It's a major reason for teams winning more games at home.

What Kemp said was also very important.

Gastric ReFlux · 12-23-2003, 11:11 AM

No I didn't forget that Skipaway. My opinion (see I'm not saying it's a fact) is that players probably tend to play better at home because they are more likely to feel comfortable and rested than they do on the road. That is my basis for suggesting a small bonus at home, a small penalty on the road. And when I say tiny, I mean tiny, something on the range of +/- of 2 percent in a player's favor when he is at home.

Of course, now I'm going to be a slider fanboy and suggest that OOTP could allow to be a function of league settings in a slider. Let the user of the game say how much a bonus/penalty they want to give the players. The advantage of that is the user could find a home field advantage that feels right.

Eugene Church · 12-23-2003, 02:20 PM

Options are always fine with me.

Good suggestion, GR.

I never have thought batting last was an advantage, because you were just getting an equal number of innings, not anything extra. The visitors has had one more inning at bat than the home team. The bottom of the ninth just evens things out.

Bottom line: statistics show overwhelmingly the home teams win more than the visitors.

And it should be put in the game if it is possible to program it.

Or make it optional.

Le Grande Orange · 12-23-2003, 06:24 PM

Of course, it should be remembered that it was not always the case that the home team batted second. In the 19th Century it was not uncommon for the home team to bat first (I believe the host team had the choice as to whether to bat first or second in some seasons). The theory was that they could score runs first and thus have the advantage of knowing how much of a lead they had to protect.

GR's idea of a user-definable slider is an excellent one.

By the way, while the overall home winning percentage stands at approximately 55%, this actually translates into 10% more wins at home for any given team. Winning 8-10% more games at home than would be expected by the overall winning percentage does seem worth emulating to me.

Eckstein 4 Prez · 12-23-2003, 07:08 PM

I agree wholeheartedly with most of the sentiments - a small boost for the home team would be realistic and appropriate.

Gastric ReFlux · 12-23-2003, 08:58 PM

I should have thought of this earlier, but something that definitely shows home field advantage is not simply having the last at bat is the presence of home field advantage in other sports such as basketball, football, and hockey. And with basketball we can safely say that it's not because of local knowledge of the playing arena, as the basketball court is standardized.

Le Grande Orange · 12-23-2003, 09:12 PM

When this subject came up with regards to TPF, I made a post over there comparing approximately the same number of games per team for the NFL, NHL, NBA, and MLB (this worked out to one MLB season, two NBA and NHL seasons, and around 10 NFL seasons).

Interestingly, MLB and the NHL came out very close, both right around 55%, the NFL was next highest with something around 60%, and the NBA with the highest with around 66%. (For the exact figures you'd have to search for the post.)

I had always thought there was a bigger home advantage in the NHL, but the seasons I looked at did not bear that out.

Single A Rookie · 12-27-2003, 12:27 PM

I DISAGREE - NO HOMEFIELD ADVANTAGE BUILT IN!!!!

Homefield advantage does not just "HAPPEN" but is rather BUILT.

Homefield advantage comes from UNDERSTANDING your ballpark, and drafting and trading for players who FIT your ballparks quirks.

You have a deep ballpark with few homers - you draft/trade for speedy outfielders, and guys who hit liners. Range and arms are going to win you penants. You can also be more relaxed in searching for pitching because mistakes will be buried in your large outfield.

You have a small ballpark - you draft big power hitters, guys who can drive the ball... range and arms aren't as important - but your pitching staff suddenly is.

You have articifical turf? Fast guys again.... short porch in left field? Better start getting those power hitting right pull guys!

Homefield advantage is as much about understanding your park than anything else.

Remember - not EVERY TEAM illustrates a home field advantage, only those that take advantage of their parks do. If you program a home field advantage into the game, then you are giving it to EVERY TEAM... and you are NULLIFYING the hard work done by SOME general managers to BUILD a team around their park GIVING them a home field advantage...

Think about it...

Le Grande Orange · 12-27-2003, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Single A Rookie
Remember - not EVERY TEAM illustrates a home field advantage, only those that take advantage of their parks do.

Have to disagree with you there.

Take a look at the home and away results from 1901-1993 (as I did). It didn't matter if the team was good or awful, 83% of all those teams from 93 full seasons finished with a better home winning record than road winning record. Are you saying 83% of all major league teams from all of those years all managed to build their teams in the way you suggest?

Not only that, but when you start breaking down the home and away records, teams which finished higher in the standings tended to have less differential between their home and away percentages. Conversely, teams with poorer records overall tended to have a higher differential between their home and road winning percentages.

If you want to see some of the detailed numbers I have covering the 1901-1960 period, I'll be happy to post 'em.

And what about the NBA, which has the highest home winning percentage of any major sport? The courts are standardized, and yet the results consistently show a huge differential between home and away winning percentages.

There are many factors at work, some of which include what you mentioned, but also includes simple familiarity with the home park (foul territory size, etc.), crowd involvement, getting the last at bat, and the simple wear and tear from being on the road for a length of time somewhat degrading performance.

It is most certainly not all attributable to one factor however,

Single A Rookie · 12-28-2003, 01:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Le Grande Orange
Take a look at the home and away results from 1901-1993 (as I did). It didn't matter if the team was good or awful, 83% of all those teams from 93 full seasons finished with a better home winning record than road winning record.

And you've proven my argument. 83% is NOT 100%.

If you add this "tweak" to the game, you are giving it to 100% of the teams... not 83%.

Le Grande Orange · 12-28-2003, 03:18 PM

Well of course its not 100%, because of the natural variability. A team can do well at home one year and not as well the next. The rate of differential is naturally variable.

But the important point is the overall trend. Sorry, but the idea that ALL of the better home percentage is due soley to teams constructing their teams for their home park strikes me as a gross overstatement.

If that were the case, I'd expect virtually all teams to do poorly on the road, since, as you claim, the teams are geared soley to their own parks. Given the rather large variety in park layout, particularly in earlier years, that would seem a natural consequence of your theory. The numbers however don't bear that out.

It's part of the reason, but by no means is it the only, or even primary, reason.

BleacherBum · 12-29-2003, 12:45 AM

And the home field advantage goes beyond just wins and losses

Major League Splits, 5 year period, before Inter-League play (chosen because schedules were more consistent within leageus):

___________AVG__OBP__SLG_Runs

1992 Home .259 .329 .386 8858
1992 Away .253 .316 .369 8483

1991 Home .259 .330 .393 9138
1991 Away .253 .317 .377 8989

1990 Home .261 .330 .391 9054
1990 Away .255 .319 .380 8865

1989 Home .257 .325 .381 8760
1989 Away .251 .315 .370 8645

1988 Home .257 .323 .385 8808
1988 Away .251 .313 .370 8572

In evey year, the home team had an advantage in each of these important offensive categories. Plus, the home teams outscored the visitors, even though the home team often only batted in 8 innings vs. the visitors 9.

Gastric ReFlux · 12-29-2003, 11:46 AM

This is a "tweak" that should be added to the game. Plus, if it were implemented in the way I suggested then you would be able to turn it off if it doesn't jibe with your notion. Simply set the home/away plus/minus factor to zero, and then go about building your teams to your park.

But most anyone with a basic understanding of statistics and results can look at the history of home teams ACROSS a NUMBER of SPORTS and see that there is something more to home-field advantage than building to the ball park. As LGO pointed out, the biggest home-field advantage exists in BASKETBALL with STANDARDIZED courts. How does a basektball team then "build" for their court?

Purely speculating, I could conjecture that home-field might have something to do with our human nature and evolutionary origins. History is rife with examples of home-teams winning in war, and in some ways, there is an odd resembalance to our sports and our wars. Competitive, a desire to defend our home turf upon which we are more likely rested and comfortable.

Mel_Ott · 12-29-2003, 03:37 PM

Let's not forget the advantages to the home team of sleeping in your own bed (as opposed to some hotel room); having family and friends nearby; having a regular 'routine' ; having the support of thousands of fans in the seats; (sometimes) not having to travel; etc.

As an example, there's a condo development across the street from Pac Bell Park. A number of Giants have condos there precisely because they can roll out of bed, walk across the street, and be at the park. Compare this with having even a moderately long trip from a hotel to the stadium - the team's going to be more relaxed, more comfortable, and less tired.

Individually, each of these effects is probably quite small; but taken together, they make a difference - a difference that appears to be reflected in stats and standings across North America's 'major' sports.

12-19-2003, 12:50 PM	#1
Eugene Church Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 36,186	OOTP6 needs home field advantage in it Since OOTP6 is being created right now, I want to get in another request for Home field advantage. I hope OOTP6 will incorporate a home field advantage, since there definitely is one in baseball. A very quick check of this past season shows 27 of 30 teams played better at home...only Toronto, KC and Milwaukee played better on the road. 7 teams played much better at home than away...Chisox, Chicubs, Oakland, Anaheim, Florida, Philadelphia, Houston, and St. Louis. Home teams averaged 44.5 wins out of 81 games at home and 36.5 wins out of 81 on the road...Home team won 55% of the time...and the fact that 27 of 30 teams do better at home is overwhelming. There is a great thread about this. I'll try to get it and post it here. http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...e&pagenumber=2 Le Grande Orange did this excellent research: This first chart takes a look at each team's home and away record for the season, and makes a simple count of whether the team did better at home, better away, or was the same at both. The numbers cover the period from 1901 to 2002: National League 82.93% American League 83.33% TOTAL 83.13%-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So, as you can see, slightly over 83% of the major league teams have finished the season with a better home winning percentage than road winning percentage. That's more that 4 out of 5 teams, covering 102 seasons. Another chart in the thread shows the home team won 55% of the time. Hope there's a way to incorporate this into OOTP6. Last edited by Eugene Church; 12-19-2003 at 09:35 PM.

12-23-2003, 09:08 AM	#7
Skipaway Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Where you live Posts: 11,017	I think it might be a huge mistake to give the home team players any advantage. Perhaps you guys forget that the team hit in the last half inning already got an advantage. They know exactly how many runs they need and could adjust the strategies better. It's a major reason for teams winning more games at home. What Kemp said was also very important. __________________ Jonathan Haidt: Moral reasoning is really just a servant masquerading as a high priest.

12-23-2003, 07:08 PM	#11
Eckstein 4 Prez Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: The OC Posts: 6,358	I agree wholeheartedly with most of the sentiments - a small boost for the home team would be realistic and appropriate. __________________ Looking for an insomnia cure? Check out my dynasty thread, The Dawn of American Professional Base Ball, 1871.

12-29-2003, 12:45 AM	#18
BleacherBum All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 672	And the home field advantage goes beyond just wins and losses Major League Splits, 5 year period, before Inter-League play (chosen because schedules were more consistent within leageus): ___________AVG__OBP__SLG_Runs 1992 Home .259 .329 .386 8858 1992 Away .253 .316 .369 8483 1991 Home .259 .330 .393 9138 1991 Away .253 .317 .377 8989 1990 Home .261 .330 .391 9054 1990 Away .255 .319 .380 8865 1989 Home .257 .325 .381 8760 1989 Away .251 .315 .370 8645 1988 Home .257 .323 .385 8808 1988 Away .251 .313 .370 8572 In evey year, the home team had an advantage in each of these important offensive categories. Plus, the home teams outscored the visitors, even though the home team often only batted in 8 innings vs. the visitors 9. __________________ Right Field Sucks!

12-29-2003, 03:37 PM	#20
Mel_Ott Registered User Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Where the deer and the antelope play Posts: 924	Let's not forget the advantages to the home team of sleeping in your own bed (as opposed to some hotel room); having family and friends nearby; having a regular 'routine' ; having the support of thousands of fans in the seats; (sometimes) not having to travel; etc. As an example, there's a condo development across the street from Pac Bell Park. A number of Giants have condos there precisely because they can roll out of bed, walk across the street, and be at the park. Compare this with having even a moderately long trip from a hotel to the stadium - the team's going to be more relaxed, more comfortable, and less tired. Individually, each of these effects is probably quite small; but taken together, they make a difference - a difference that appears to be reflected in stats and standings across North America's 'major' sports. __________________ jgross's worst nightmare!!!!111 Owner, Sin City Swingers, OBTL

12-19-2003, 01:22 PM	#2
Gastric ReFlux Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Member #3409 Posts: 8,350	I agree. I tend to think it could be implemented simply enough by giving all players a small bonus when playing at home and a small drop when playing on the road.

12-19-2003, 01:28 PM	#3
draven085 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: New Jersey Posts: 2,074	Agreed. I would love to see this in OOTP6.

12-19-2003, 01:59 PM	#4
Eugene Church Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 36,186	Draven: Did you agree with me or Gastric?

12-19-2003, 02:29 PM	#5
draven085 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: New Jersey Posts: 2,074	Both, actually. I think home field advantage is something that is missing from most sports games. I'd love to see it make it's way into OOTP. I think Gassy's way of handling it would work out nicely.

12-23-2003, 08:14 AM	#6
Kemp All Star Starter Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 1,181	I think we need to be a little careful here. I think that SOME (but not all) of the home field advantage you might be seeing here is simply teams taking advantage of their own home ballpark effects. That is, tailoring their team to their environment. In that case, no "bonus" would be needed as owners will simply derive that advantage themselves. However, I do agree that there is MORE to home field advantage than JUST park factors. I'd caution against giving players too large of a "bonus". So instead of making players 5% better at home (to recreate the 55% home winning percentage) maybe 2% would be more realistic (just making numbers up as an example).

12-23-2003, 11:11 AM	#8
Gastric ReFlux Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Member #3409 Posts: 8,350	No I didn't forget that Skipaway. My opinion (see I'm not saying it's a fact) is that players probably tend to play better at home because they are more likely to feel comfortable and rested than they do on the road. That is my basis for suggesting a small bonus at home, a small penalty on the road. And when I say tiny, I mean tiny, something on the range of +/- of 2 percent in a player's favor when he is at home. Of course, now I'm going to be a slider fanboy and suggest that OOTP could allow to be a function of league settings in a slider. Let the user of the game say how much a bonus/penalty they want to give the players. The advantage of that is the user could find a home field advantage that feels right.

12-23-2003, 02:20 PM	#9
Eugene Church Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 36,186	Options are always fine with me. Good suggestion, GR. I never have thought batting last was an advantage, because you were just getting an equal number of innings, not anything extra. The visitors has had one more inning at bat than the home team. The bottom of the ninth just evens things out. Bottom line: statistics show overwhelmingly the home teams win more than the visitors. And it should be put in the game if it is possible to program it. Or make it optional.

12-23-2003, 06:24 PM	#10
Le Grande Orange Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Up There Posts: 15,644	Of course, it should be remembered that it was not always the case that the home team batted second. In the 19th Century it was not uncommon for the home team to bat first (I believe the host team had the choice as to whether to bat first or second in some seasons). The theory was that they could score runs first and thus have the advantage of knowing how much of a lead they had to protect. GR's idea of a user-definable slider is an excellent one. By the way, while the overall home winning percentage stands at approximately 55%, this actually translates into 10% more wins at home for any given team. Winning 8-10% more games at home than would be expected by the overall winning percentage does seem worth emulating to me.

12-23-2003, 08:58 PM	#12
Gastric ReFlux Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Member #3409 Posts: 8,350	I should have thought of this earlier, but something that definitely shows home field advantage is not simply having the last at bat is the presence of home field advantage in other sports such as basketball, football, and hockey. And with basketball we can safely say that it's not because of local knowledge of the playing arena, as the basketball court is standardized.

12-23-2003, 09:12 PM	#13
Le Grande Orange Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Up There Posts: 15,644	When this subject came up with regards to TPF, I made a post over there comparing approximately the same number of games per team for the NFL, NHL, NBA, and MLB (this worked out to one MLB season, two NBA and NHL seasons, and around 10 NFL seasons). Interestingly, MLB and the NHL came out very close, both right around 55%, the NFL was next highest with something around 60%, and the NBA with the highest with around 66%. (For the exact figures you'd have to search for the post.) I had always thought there was a bigger home advantage in the NHL, but the seasons I looked at did not bear that out.

12-27-2003, 12:27 PM	#14
Single A Rookie Registered User Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 144	I DISAGREE - NO HOMEFIELD ADVANTAGE BUILT IN!!!! Homefield advantage does not just "HAPPEN" but is rather BUILT. Homefield advantage comes from UNDERSTANDING your ballpark, and drafting and trading for players who FIT your ballparks quirks. You have a deep ballpark with few homers - you draft/trade for speedy outfielders, and guys who hit liners. Range and arms are going to win you penants. You can also be more relaxed in searching for pitching because mistakes will be buried in your large outfield. You have a small ballpark - you draft big power hitters, guys who can drive the ball... range and arms aren't as important - but your pitching staff suddenly is. You have articifical turf? Fast guys again.... short porch in left field? Better start getting those power hitting right pull guys! Homefield advantage is as much about understanding your park than anything else. Remember - not EVERY TEAM illustrates a home field advantage, only those that take advantage of their parks do. If you program a home field advantage into the game, then you are giving it to EVERY TEAM... and you are NULLIFYING the hard work done by SOME general managers to BUILD a team around their park GIVING them a home field advantage... Think about it...

12-28-2003, 03:18 PM	#17
Le Grande Orange Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Up There Posts: 15,644	Well of course its not 100%, because of the natural variability. A team can do well at home one year and not as well the next. The rate of differential is naturally variable. But the important point is the overall trend. Sorry, but the idea that ALL of the better home percentage is due soley to teams constructing their teams for their home park strikes me as a gross overstatement. If that were the case, I'd expect virtually all teams to do poorly on the road, since, as you claim, the teams are geared soley to their own parks. Given the rather large variety in park layout, particularly in earlier years, that would seem a natural consequence of your theory. The numbers however don't bear that out. It's part of the reason, but by no means is it the only, or even primary, reason.

12-29-2003, 11:46 AM	#19
Gastric ReFlux Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Member #3409 Posts: 8,350	This is a "tweak" that should be added to the game. Plus, if it were implemented in the way I suggested then you would be able to turn it off if it doesn't jibe with your notion. Simply set the home/away plus/minus factor to zero, and then go about building your teams to your park. But most anyone with a basic understanding of statistics and results can look at the history of home teams ACROSS a NUMBER of SPORTS and see that there is something more to home-field advantage than building to the ball park. As LGO pointed out, the biggest home-field advantage exists in BASKETBALL with STANDARDIZED courts. How does a basektball team then "build" for their court? Purely speculating, I could conjecture that home-field might have something to do with our human nature and evolutionary origins. History is rife with examples of home-teams winning in war, and in some ways, there is an odd resembalance to our sports and our wars. Competitive, a desire to defend our home turf upon which we are more likely rested and comfortable.