Post by seeyajohn on Dec 21, 2018 10:41:49 GMT -5
As I was watching the final two regular season Penn State matches, I noticed that the timeouts called by the coaches seemed to be very effective. Indeed, in checking the data, Minnesota scored the point following their called timeout 5 out of 7 timeouts. Wisconsin scored 6 times after their seven timeouts. Meanwhile, Penn State was scoring the next point 11 times after their 14 timeouts. It also seemed to me that, over the course of the season, the server was more likely to commit an error after an opposition-called timeout.
I got to wondering if timeouts were always that effective. Since I had the data for PSU’s B1G matches, I looked at team-called timeouts and noted whether the server erred and whether the team calling the timeout won the next point. (Note: I realize that the purpose of most timeouts is to curb momentum and that the sample was only the 20 B1G games played by PSU. But, still, I think the result is interesting)
As it turns out, the opponents called 116 timeouts while PSU called 67 during the twenty matches.
After an opponent’s timeout, the Penn State server committed an error 12 times (10.3%) and the opponents won the next point 65 times (56.0%).
After a Penn State timeout, the opponents’ server committed an error 8 times (11.9%) and Penn State won the next point 39 times (58.2%).
So, what?
?
Well, I decided to compare those results against the generic results for all points played!
Looking at Penn State serving first. Penn State served 1424 times. They erred 129 times (9.1%) and the opponents scored 799 times (57.2%). So, we have:
Overall After Opponents Timeout
PSU Server Errors 9.1% 10.3%
Opponent Sides Out 57.2% 56.0%
The opponents served 1250 times. They erred 126 times (10.1%). Penn State scored 810 times (66.7%).
Overall After PSU Timeout
Opponent Server Errors 10.1% 11.9%
Penn State Sides Out 66.7% 58.2%
So, it appears that calling a timeout, to a small degree, “freezes” the server.
However, Penn State managed to side out significantly less often after their timeouts than they did overall against the opponent’s serve. The opponents’ rate of scoring against PSU’s serve was roughly the same after they called timeout as it was overall.
So are timeouts effective. Probably!
Two mitigating factors likely account for results after timeouts being below overall results. First, teams usually call timeouts when momentum has swung against them. Secondly, teams call timeouts more frequently when they are playing against equal or superior competitors and therefore are going to be less successful than their overall record would indicate. Besides, everybody does it!
I got to wondering if timeouts were always that effective. Since I had the data for PSU’s B1G matches, I looked at team-called timeouts and noted whether the server erred and whether the team calling the timeout won the next point. (Note: I realize that the purpose of most timeouts is to curb momentum and that the sample was only the 20 B1G games played by PSU. But, still, I think the result is interesting)
As it turns out, the opponents called 116 timeouts while PSU called 67 during the twenty matches.
After an opponent’s timeout, the Penn State server committed an error 12 times (10.3%) and the opponents won the next point 65 times (56.0%).
After a Penn State timeout, the opponents’ server committed an error 8 times (11.9%) and Penn State won the next point 39 times (58.2%).
So, what?
?Well, I decided to compare those results against the generic results for all points played!
Looking at Penn State serving first. Penn State served 1424 times. They erred 129 times (9.1%) and the opponents scored 799 times (57.2%). So, we have:
Overall After Opponents Timeout
PSU Server Errors 9.1% 10.3%
Opponent Sides Out 57.2% 56.0%
The opponents served 1250 times. They erred 126 times (10.1%). Penn State scored 810 times (66.7%).
Overall After PSU Timeout
Opponent Server Errors 10.1% 11.9%
Penn State Sides Out 66.7% 58.2%
So, it appears that calling a timeout, to a small degree, “freezes” the server.
However, Penn State managed to side out significantly less often after their timeouts than they did overall against the opponent’s serve. The opponents’ rate of scoring against PSU’s serve was roughly the same after they called timeout as it was overall.
So are timeouts effective. Probably!
Two mitigating factors likely account for results after timeouts being below overall results. First, teams usually call timeouts when momentum has swung against them. Secondly, teams call timeouts more frequently when they are playing against equal or superior competitors and therefore are going to be less successful than their overall record would indicate. Besides, everybody does it!
