Win probability in broadcasts is stupid

[bmags]

http://awfulannouncing.com/espn/many-fans-...inals-cubs.html

 

Though I love analytics in baseball I've been somewhat skeptical of how it is used in broadcasts. It isn't a particularly verbal language, I think part of the reason WAR took off was it was easy to say.

 

But it has been interesting to see the stats that have been pulled out and highlighted. The hit velocity stuff I really like, same with trajectory.

 

But another is win probability. For some reason they think it's very interesting to show who is most likely to win throughout the game.

 

I'm not sure I ever find win probability interesting. There are some cool analysis pieces showing how dramatically a game swung in one play and ranking it HISTORICALLY, but that's it for me.

 

Probabilities are interesting when they are helping inform how you should act. Or elections over a long period of time, they help explain the "race". But in a game? A 2-hour game, where it quite obviously will swing?

 

Boring. It's stupid. It isn't informative. It isn't interesting.

 

Down with win probability.

[LittleHurt05]

I think it's a fun number to look at when used in the right context and situation. What ESPN seems to be doing is 100% wrong.

[ptatc]

http://awfulannouncing.com/espn/many-fans-...inals-cubs.html

 

Though I love analytics in baseball I've been somewhat skeptical of how it is used in broadcasts. It isn't a particularly verbal language, I think part of the reason WAR took off was it was easy to say.

 

But it has been interesting to see the stats that have been pulled out and highlighted. The hit velocity stuff I really like, same with trajectory.

 

But another is win probability. For some reason they think it's very interesting to show who is most likely to win throughout the game.

 

I'm not sure I ever find win probability interesting. There are some cool analysis pieces showing how dramatically a game swung in one play and ranking it HISTORICALLY, but that's it for me.

 

Probabilities are interesting when they are helping inform how you should act. Or elections over a long period of time, they help explain the "race". But in a game? A 2-hour game, where it quite obviously will swing?

 

Boring. It's stupid. It isn't informative. It isn't interesting.

 

Down with win probability.

I'm not a hugefan of the analytics in broadcasts in general. I want to know what is happening during the game with current action. Much of the analytics detracts from this. But there are some that are moreannoying than others and Iagree win probability is one of them. Theyare just trying to get the fans to feel more they know more about the game than they do.