Down by 2 touchdowns, go for 2 theory.

[valenzuela]

So lets suppose team X is down by 14 againt team Y, there is Z( i dunno the value of Z but i do know z is a positive value) time left. Team X should go for 2, here is why.
If team X scores another TD they will regret going for one on the long run
If team X scores two td here are the outcomes:
If team X goes for one one the first TD they will lose 1,594% of the time.( trust me, do the math by urself)And they will force OT on the other games.
If team X goes for two they will lose 36% of the time, they will win however 39,6% of the time.
So why dont teams go for 2 when theyre down by 8 late on the game??
Here is the val theory( who was stolen from somebody else i dont remember)

Sorry, I don't speak jibberish.

[tomdemaine]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, I don't speak gibberish.

[/ QUOTE ]

clearly you do [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[BadBoyBenny]

How do you lose more than 100% of the time???

[Victor]

ummmm. this may be the most inciteful and perceptive post ever written in this forum.

[Voltron87]

[ QUOTE ]
So lets suppose team X is down by 14 againt team Y, there is Z( i dunno the value of Z but i do know z is a positive value) time left. Team X should go for 2, here is why.
If team X scores another TD they will regret going for one on the long run
If team X scores two td here are the outcomes:
If team X goes for one one the first TD they will lose 1,594% of the time.( trust me, do the math by urself)And they will force OT on the other games.
If team X goes for two they will lose 36% of the time, they will win however 39,6% of the time.
So why dont teams go for 2 when theyre down by 8 late on the game??
Here is the val theory( who was stolen from somebody else i dont remember)

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT

sklunsky understood. shows you are deficient in math.

[Voltron87]

[ QUOTE ]
sklunsky understood. shows you are deficient in math.

[/ QUOTE ]

no, i understand it, its not complicated. my post was mostly about valenzuelas awful layout and wording. he also has a history of posts like these, like his tennis predictions. and i dont know why im defending myself to a gimmick account.

[valenzuela]

English isnt my mother language...I knew somebody would figure the post out and the discussion would start.
I think NFL coaches are big pussies AND theyre not really good at math.( btw in my example i have 99% for a PAT, 40% is a conservative amount so that ppl realize its still +EV)

Imagine the indianapolis colts.
First of all an NFL coach is probably not a stupid person, however he might be bad at math and thereby wont get the theory at first but he should get it on the end. So now the coach know its better going for 2.
Now the coach needs to explain the theory to all of his staff, lets suppose they all understand the theory.
Now the coach needs to expalin the theory to the owner, after a lot of talking...the owner will say something like " that strategy of urs better workout"...ok so now the coach knows he will get flamed if he loses.
The coach needs to expalin the theory to the players........after 8237299272729819 years all the players get the theory.
So know all the teams know its better to go for 2.

Lets suppose its the AFC championship game and Indy is behind 14 against NE....4 minutes to go.
TD indy!!!!! wooo.
Tony Dungy mind: shiit, if we miss the 2 pt. attempt we are soooooo screwed. Damn...I think I rather go for one.
I cant be a sissy I have to go for 2, I know its better, i know it.
Tony Dungy: Ok boys lets go for 1
Manning: yeah its better.
Announcer: Indy are down by 7!!!
other announcer: now the defence needs to step up here, they have allowed 162 rushing yards today, etc.

[Voltron87]

i understand english is a second language for you, but saying stuff like "ur", RANDOMLY CAPITALIZING and atrocious spacing are sort of unrelated to language.


Everyone gets this. It has been around for decades and it is not complicated.