When Confronted with An Explanation that is Based on Mathematics

[lu_hawk]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One example of this is the "hot hand" in basketball. Statistical analysis has shown that this is a myth. That is a particular player has exactly the same chance of making his next shot whether he has missed his last five shots or made his last five shots. Every discussion I have seen of this topic has resulted in vigorous rebuttal from basketball players. The rebuttal is always based on personal experience and never on the actual statistical analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really on the subject of mathamatical debating, but I disagree with your belief that the "hot hand", as you call it, is entirely mythical. There is such a thing as a player getting into his rhytem. It probably has to do with muscle memory or something similar. I agree that it's not because he is just "on fire tonight" or some other made up explaination, but science and human anatomy can prove that muscle memory is very real, and could very well affect the performance of a basketball player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Reread his post. Statistical analysis has shown that the hot hand is a myth. It doesn't matter how much common sense says that there might be some validity behind the hot hand concept because statistical analysis has shown it to be false.

[Paul2432]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One example of this is the "hot hand" in basketball. Statistical analysis has shown that this is a myth. That is a particular player has exactly the same chance of making his next shot whether he has missed his last five shots or made his last five shots. Every discussion I have seen of this topic has resulted in vigorous rebuttal from basketball players. The rebuttal is always based on personal experience and never on the actual statistical analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really on the subject of mathamatical debating, but I disagree with your belief that the "hot hand", as you call it, is entirely mythical. There is such a thing as a player getting into his rhytem. It probably has to do with muscle memory or something similar. I agree that it's not because he is just "on fire tonight" or some other made up explaination, but science and human anatomy can prove that muscle memory is very real, and could very well affect the performance of a basketball player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Reread his post. Statistical analysis has shown that the hot hand is a myth. It doesn't matter how much common sense says that there might be some validity behind the hot hand concept because statistical analysis has shown it to be false.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for writing this Hawk. I've thinking how to follow up on my earlier two posts in this thread and you nailed my thoughts.

>---<
<--->

Most of us are probably familiar with the optical illusion shown not very well above. Drawn properly the upper line will look longer than the lower line even though they are equal in length.

Now think about the following conversation:

A: The top line is longer.

B: No. They are the same length it just looks that way.

A: The top line is longer, I can see it with my own eyes.

B: (gets ruler and measures each line showing they are the same) I just measured the lines and they are the same.

A: I know what I see. The top line is longer.

. . . and so on.

The hot hand nay-sayers in this thread are like "A" above.

Paul

[Triumph36]

Those examples aren't the same at all. This isn't an optical illusion. What we are saying is that the analyses done on 'hot hand' shooters are fallacious. Generally, the hot hand still may not exist, but I'm still probably giving the shot to the guy who's shooting best in a tie game at the end. If my best statistical shooter over the season is missing shots that night, I am not giving the shot to him. You suggest that you would.

Not to mention that taking shots in basketball is never a ceteris paribus situation, not even close. I suppose the claim is that even without all being equal, the range of possible shots is still the same.

The analysis is not at ALL taking into account all the factors. And your fallacious counter-arguments are showing that mathematical analyses and their proponents tend to be stubborn, overly so, especially in cases where it is unjustified.

[k_squared]

[ QUOTE ]
Reread his post. Statistical analysis has shown that the hot hand is a myth. It doesn't matter how much common sense says that there might be some validity behind the hot hand concept because statistical analysis has shown it to be false.

[/ QUOTE ]

'Statistical Analysis' is a valuable tool, but it can only show whether something is true or not given the assumptions and restraints that we put upon the system we use. We have to make choices regarding how we collect data, what data fits into our information, and then we have to also interpret the data itself. It is not unreasonable to question the legitimacy of a stastical analysis. Just because the statistical test shows it to be true does not mean that it is in fact true, just that more precisely: the test shows that there is no such thing as a 'hot hand'. Numbers are tools and must be carefully manipulated to help us see the world more clearly. But, if used poorly they can also misrepresent the 'true' nature of the world. For a long time math 'proved' that the earth was the center of the universe... that didn't in fact make it true... I don't know whether or not there is such a thing as a 'hot hand' but you can't just say "look they proved it in this study." Show us the evidence that legitimizes how the study happened, the assuptions they made, the method for gathering data, and that is a start. But be ready to listen to the inevitable challenges that will arise based on flaws in the studies design.... unless it was a perfect study of the "hot hand!"

-K_squared