Statistics "Number don't lie"

Casting
Posts
519
Joined
2/8/2017
Location
PA US
7/4/2017 9:38am Edited Date/Time 7/6/2017 12:10pm
Statistics don't lie, but people can present statistics in a misleading manner (sometimes unintentionally) to misinform their audience.

http://racerxonline.com/2017/07/04/breakdown-subtle-shades-of-gray


Before I go any further further, I want to make it clear that I agree Jason Anderson is partially at fault for the collision between himself and Baggett on the opening lap at Red Bud. The part I disagree with is JT's ability to present statistics in a scientifically correct format.

After listening to the RacerX podcast on Monday I was eager to read JT's Breakdown on RacerXOnline. He sounded very confident and repeated "Number don't lie" or some variant of that phrase while hinting that he had used some statistics to back of his difference of opinion with Grant Langston.

Full disclosure, JT is obviously a smarter and more talented racer than I could ever have dreamed of being. No doubt about that. To use a cliche, he has forgotten more about the topic than I probably will ever learn. That being said, I disagree with his use of statistics in his column this week and I even feel a bit awkward attempting to challenge the work of someone who so easily outranks me in terms of knowledge. I mean no disrespect, I only wish to open a dialogue about how I (And potentially others) see this situation.


My first concern is that there is no Inter-Rater Reliability. This basically means that because JT was the only person collecting time's for the section, his times cannot be compared to anyone elses to determine if his times are accurate. To know for sure, it is good to have another person time the section too.

Secondly, and most importantly, JT writes "After analyzing the numbers, I hypothesized that Anderson indeed slowed just a touch in order to make sure Baggett’s intersection point would be filled by a Husky 450.". and here we identify a cardinal rule being broken as JT declares his hypothesis after analyzing data.

Why is this important? When following the scientific method, or attempting to, you always declare a hypothesis before collecting and analyzing data, so as to ensure you do not bias yourself, or participate in what we call "confirmation bias" whereby someone looks for information to confirm an already held belief.

A hypothesis is declared and then tested with the data that is collected, not the other way around.

Thirdly, JT proposes these statistics in a vacuum. Where is the baseline for comparison? How many other riders lap times in this section did JT watch "hundreds" of times, measure, and analyze? None, it seems. Which goes back to the previous point, he was only looking for data to back up a preexisting belief rather than analyzing the totality of the situation (more than a single rider).

People may wonder why I would go through the trouble of posting all this if I generally agree with JT that Anderson did indeed slow slightly to cause contact with Baggett and my reason is this: he claimed "numbers don't lie" on the podcast repeatedly which fools people into thinking that so long as you have numbers to back your point you are more-correct than others.

My thought is, if you are going to go the extra mile and attempt to add statistics to the journalism, at least do it in a scientifically correct manner.

I wonder, am I totally off base and an idiot here? I could be. Does anyone have any similar or differing thoughts on the topic?

Just want to hear the thoughts of other community members.

|
dirtnapper
Posts
5457
Joined
4/14/2011
Location
Alberta CA
7/4/2017 9:50am
This is a LOT of speculation on a simple racing incident.

Wow. Blink JT seems pretty convinced. My question is - who cares?? Its two guys going very hard for a Championship! Seems like a very small incident to pick apart so much like him and the OP of this thread are doing.......nothing better to do I guess??
cameron96
Posts
737
Joined
10/4/2016
Location
CA
7/4/2017 9:55am
Incidents and the opinions that's go along with them make for great story lines and conversation. Something our sport needs more of!

Bring on the action, get people talking... simple way to build things up resulting in more fan engagement and therefore series growth

It's basic marketing
Casting
Posts
519
Joined
2/8/2017
Location
PA US
7/4/2017 9:58am
dirtnapper wrote:
This is a LOT of speculation on a simple racing incident. Wow. :blink: JT seems pretty convinced. My question is - who cares?? Its two guys...
This is a LOT of speculation on a simple racing incident.

Wow. Blink JT seems pretty convinced. My question is - who cares?? Its two guys going very hard for a Championship! Seems like a very small incident to pick apart so much like him and the OP of this thread are doing.......nothing better to do I guess??
Nope, nothing better :D I was mainly curious about getting feedback from other people, which you provided, so my goal is kind of coming to fruition.

Was going to hit the trails but my mountain bikes rear tire is flat and I can't find the leak to patch it. Thinking it is a valve issue.

The Shop

Casting
Posts
519
Joined
2/8/2017
Location
PA US
7/4/2017 10:00am
TeamGreen wrote:
Yawn
I think we all know your opinion of JT and the host of the podcast where he talked about this.

Inb4 something about my account join date.
bvm111
Posts
9287
Joined
7/1/2008
Location
Las Vegas, NV US
7/4/2017 10:02am


philG
Posts
9630
Joined
5/12/2012
Location
GB
7/4/2017 10:03am
I would have done the same to stop BB cutting back, legit race move, invited by taking the wide line, Anderson did what he needed to do , made the move and covered the counter all in one go,

APLMAN99
Posts
10055
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Dallas, TX US
7/4/2017 10:09am
TL:DR

But for what it's worth, statistics suggest that the average American has approximately one testicle.......
Katoomey
Posts
1714
Joined
1/18/2013
Location
WY US
7/4/2017 10:13am
Get a fuckin life...
kzizok
Posts
8392
Joined
10/19/2010
Location
AS US
Fantasy
1859th
7/4/2017 10:15am
Very strange.
moto0852
Posts
944
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Draper, UT US
7/4/2017 10:15am
Good grief! Back away from your computer and go ride.
kijen
Posts
1029
Joined
10/1/2010
Location
Jacksonville, FL US
7/4/2017 10:16am
Op, I agree, anyone can use numbers selectivity to prove their point. On the other hand I don't view JT as a journalist, no matter how accomplished he is on bike. Just another racer bench racing and having a platform to voice his opinion, which is neither more wrong or right then any others opinon. Journalist should be reporting what happened, not their opinion of why etc.. which is why I personally don't care, because I have my own opinion tooSmile
Hut
Posts
10286
Joined
4/27/2010
Location
WA US
7/4/2017 10:18am
tldnr Zzzz
TeamGreen
Posts
28676
Joined
11/25/2008
Location
Thru-out, CA US
7/4/2017 10:27am Edited Date/Time 7/4/2017 10:31am
TeamGreen wrote:
Yawn
Casting wrote:
I think we all know your opinion of JT and the host of the podcast where he talked about this. Inb4 something about my account join...
I think we all know your opinion of JT and the host of the podcast where he talked about this.

Inb4 something about my account join date.
No, I don't think you do. I'm quite the fan of his analysis and opinion: I'm not a fan of the shit that it turns into...in here amongst the armchair-warriors. So, my bad for not explaining my "yawn"...

As for his analysis of the splits in that section of the track and on a given lap: I think the simple fact that he was racing with Blake on ONLY the lap in question and fighting for lines with Blake ONLY on that lap could very well explain the longer time (of the split). In a scientific sense, this would be a determining factor for any real empirical data: the only lap where all the necessary variables ARE PRESENT. Not to mention it was the VERY 1ST LAP and riders are flying into lines for the 1st time and bouncing off of crap...for the 1st time.

JT's knowledge and understanding of what's going on out there is well beyond ANY would be insider that's gonna post in here. That doesn't mean his logic for the analysis in this case is correct. In recognition of JT's own words...

"After analyzing the numbers, I hypothesized that Anderson indeed slowed just a touch..." There it is: "hypothesized". I'd introduce the simple consideration that Lap 1 was the only time when these two guys were racing each other...getting in each-other's way...zig zagging across the track...that it did, indeed, Slow Them Down. The data isn't consistent after the 1st lap.

My opinion of JT is that this is an excellent discussion and he brings really good methods to his position.
Hank_Thrill
Posts
4502
Joined
9/22/2008
Location
Arlen, TX US
7/4/2017 10:33am
I think the OP is in a research class. Seems like something I would post a few years ago. The interrater reliability is an easy fix. Just get more people to do the same experiment he did with the camera and stopwatch.

I say this study be postponed. Before that, have Jason record his thoughts and intentions during that corner, save the recording in a motocross time capsule. Then open it back up five years after his pro career is over so we can post the results in this thread.

I just hope Blake is taking notes of the big picture. What you say off the track can make your life more difficult on the track. Dungey is a great example of what to do. Now imagine if Barcia were ever in the running for a title. There would be at least a dozen guys who could easily make his life extremely difficult.
kzizok
Posts
8392
Joined
10/19/2010
Location
AS US
Fantasy
1859th
7/4/2017 10:52am
OP, you happen to know anyone named Colorado2day?
langhammx
Posts
8904
Joined
5/5/2011
Location
Santa Clarita, CA US
Fantasy
323rd
7/4/2017 11:08am
Katoomey wrote:
Get a fuckin life...
You sure do seem to talk a lot of shit, name calling and putting people down seem to be a regular thing for you. Does it make you feel good or is it just a bad habit of yours ? Just curious, since you seem to come off as a tough guy and I'm guessing you're probably just a kid or maybe just haven't grown up yet....
H4L
Posts
2499
Joined
3/18/2016
Location
CA US
7/4/2017 11:30am
Racing incident.. The scientific, analysis, hypothesis etc. can be collected, but it doesn't really matter in the end as it can just boil down to one persons opinion vs. another of what happened. This is MX & there both competing for a championship. I wouldn't read to much into it.
BMSOBx2
Posts
2088
Joined
2/18/2017
Location
Antioch, CA US
7/4/2017 11:46am
Cliff notes version? I got a barbecue to start. Tongue
RG1
Posts
4663
Joined
7/12/2015
Location
GB
7/4/2017 11:49am
I really don't think there was anything to this move. I don't think Anderson particularly cared that Baggett crashed, but I put more blame on Baggett than Anderson. Baggett had to know where Anderson was, he has to slow up there and drop in behind JA, I'm not really sure why he went so wide on the first lap anyway. I don't really buy that Anderson must've deliberately slowed because his sector time was slower either. You can see when he comes into the turn and gets into the rut that he gets into the rut at an angle, which unsettles the bike, after this he seems to get on the throttle pretty much as normal. We're only talking about half a second. I know JA has a reputation, but I don't really buy it on this occasion. Baggett can't blame anyone else but himself for his crash
Madc32
Posts
225
Joined
7/10/2014
Location
Portland, OR US
7/4/2017 11:57am
I Like turtles.
gt80rider
Posts
6275
Joined
4/19/2008
Location
Boulder, CO US
7/4/2017 12:04pm
Casting wrote:
Statistics don't lie, but people can present statistics in a misleading manner (sometimes unintentionally) to misinform their audience. http://racerxonline.com/2017/07/04/breakdown-subtle-shades-of-gray Before I go any further further, I...
Statistics don't lie, but people can present statistics in a misleading manner (sometimes unintentionally) to misinform their audience.

http://racerxonline.com/2017/07/04/breakdown-subtle-shades-of-gray


Before I go any further further, I want to make it clear that I agree Jason Anderson is partially at fault for the collision between himself and Baggett on the opening lap at Red Bud. The part I disagree with is JT's ability to present statistics in a scientifically correct format.

After listening to the RacerX podcast on Monday I was eager to read JT's Breakdown on RacerXOnline. He sounded very confident and repeated "Number don't lie" or some variant of that phrase while hinting that he had used some statistics to back of his difference of opinion with Grant Langston.

Full disclosure, JT is obviously a smarter and more talented racer than I could ever have dreamed of being. No doubt about that. To use a cliche, he has forgotten more about the topic than I probably will ever learn. That being said, I disagree with his use of statistics in his column this week and I even feel a bit awkward attempting to challenge the work of someone who so easily outranks me in terms of knowledge. I mean no disrespect, I only wish to open a dialogue about how I (And potentially others) see this situation.


My first concern is that there is no Inter-Rater Reliability. This basically means that because JT was the only person collecting time's for the section, his times cannot be compared to anyone elses to determine if his times are accurate. To know for sure, it is good to have another person time the section too.

Secondly, and most importantly, JT writes "After analyzing the numbers, I hypothesized that Anderson indeed slowed just a touch in order to make sure Baggett’s intersection point would be filled by a Husky 450.". and here we identify a cardinal rule being broken as JT declares his hypothesis after analyzing data.

Why is this important? When following the scientific method, or attempting to, you always declare a hypothesis before collecting and analyzing data, so as to ensure you do not bias yourself, or participate in what we call "confirmation bias" whereby someone looks for information to confirm an already held belief.

A hypothesis is declared and then tested with the data that is collected, not the other way around.

Thirdly, JT proposes these statistics in a vacuum. Where is the baseline for comparison? How many other riders lap times in this section did JT watch "hundreds" of times, measure, and analyze? None, it seems. Which goes back to the previous point, he was only looking for data to back up a preexisting belief rather than analyzing the totality of the situation (more than a single rider).

People may wonder why I would go through the trouble of posting all this if I generally agree with JT that Anderson did indeed slow slightly to cause contact with Baggett and my reason is this: he claimed "numbers don't lie" on the podcast repeatedly which fools people into thinking that so long as you have numbers to back your point you are more-correct than others.

My thought is, if you are going to go the extra mile and attempt to add statistics to the journalism, at least do it in a scientifically correct manner.

I wonder, am I totally off base and an idiot here? I could be. Does anyone have any similar or differing thoughts on the topic?

Just want to hear the thoughts of other community members.

Dumb it down a few notches Mr Hawkin.... Oh and lose about 2000 words if u expect people on here to read it...
Casting
Posts
519
Joined
2/8/2017
Location
PA US
7/4/2017 12:13pm Edited Date/Time 7/4/2017 12:15pm
I think the OP is in a research class. Seems like something I would post a few years ago. The interrater reliability is an easy fix...
I think the OP is in a research class. Seems like something I would post a few years ago. The interrater reliability is an easy fix. Just get more people to do the same experiment he did with the camera and stopwatch.

I say this study be postponed. Before that, have Jason record his thoughts and intentions during that corner, save the recording in a motocross time capsule. Then open it back up five years after his pro career is over so we can post the results in this thread.

I just hope Blake is taking notes of the big picture. What you say off the track can make your life more difficult on the track. Dungey is a great example of what to do. Now imagine if Barcia were ever in the running for a title. There would be at least a dozen guys who could easily make his life extremely difficult.
I'm not in a research class. I work part time conducting research that we present at conferences and publish in journals.

I realize my post was really long, probably too long, but I was trying to really explain what I was talking about.
TeamGreen
Posts
28676
Joined
11/25/2008
Location
Thru-out, CA US
7/4/2017 12:16pm
I think the OP is in a research class. Seems like something I would post a few years ago. The interrater reliability is an easy fix...
I think the OP is in a research class. Seems like something I would post a few years ago. The interrater reliability is an easy fix. Just get more people to do the same experiment he did with the camera and stopwatch.

I say this study be postponed. Before that, have Jason record his thoughts and intentions during that corner, save the recording in a motocross time capsule. Then open it back up five years after his pro career is over so we can post the results in this thread.

I just hope Blake is taking notes of the big picture. What you say off the track can make your life more difficult on the track. Dungey is a great example of what to do. Now imagine if Barcia were ever in the running for a title. There would be at least a dozen guys who could easily make his life extremely difficult.
Casting wrote:
I'm not in a research class. I work part time conducting research that we present at conferences and publish in journals. I realize my post was...
I'm not in a research class. I work part time conducting research that we present at conferences and publish in journals.

I realize my post was really long, probably too long, but I was trying to really explain what I was talking about.
Then why didn't you notice the change in the data that makes all the difference?
CrGuy2T
Posts
4177
Joined
3/11/2015
Location
Santa Fe, TX US
Fantasy
3665th
7/4/2017 12:19pm Edited Date/Time 7/4/2017 12:28pm
Ahh who cares Jason Anderson can do what he wants. Although, that was probably one of the cleanest passes Jason has taken in the event of going for it! I think he could have really destroyed Blake in that pass if he just wanted to.
Falcon
Posts
10041
Joined
11/16/2011
Location
Menifee, CA US
Fantasy
765th
7/4/2017 12:22pm
Without knowing what JT$ even said, I'm going to reiterate my "leader's prerogative" claim:

Jason Anderson was leading Bagget at the time. In that scenario, he can go anywhere on the track he wants and at whatever speed, without any responsibility to Bagget's line choice. In fact, slowing down (if he indeed did that) is a brilliant move in that section.

This is from a guy who was genuinely bummed that Blake went down.
TbonesPop
Posts
3452
Joined
1/26/2010
Location
Gilbert, AZ US
Fantasy
360th
7/4/2017 12:30pm
Boobies are fun
Lester
Posts
105
Joined
4/2/2017
Location
CA
7/4/2017 12:59pm
I think the OP is in a research class. Seems like something I would post a few years ago. The interrater reliability is an easy fix...
I think the OP is in a research class. Seems like something I would post a few years ago. The interrater reliability is an easy fix. Just get more people to do the same experiment he did with the camera and stopwatch.

I say this study be postponed. Before that, have Jason record his thoughts and intentions during that corner, save the recording in a motocross time capsule. Then open it back up five years after his pro career is over so we can post the results in this thread.

I just hope Blake is taking notes of the big picture. What you say off the track can make your life more difficult on the track. Dungey is a great example of what to do. Now imagine if Barcia were ever in the running for a title. There would be at least a dozen guys who could easily make his life extremely difficult.
Casting wrote:
I'm not in a research class. I work part time conducting research that we present at conferences and publish in journals. I realize my post was...
I'm not in a research class. I work part time conducting research that we present at conferences and publish in journals.

I realize my post was really long, probably too long, but I was trying to really explain what I was talking about.
Consider your audience, which in this case probably has very low IQs. And a general rule here is that you can't question Team Green because he'll point out that you're a minion. Also, I would just point out that I don't think JT$ was attempting a strict scientific methodology here; I'm sure he was being more anecdotal.
langhammx
Posts
8904
Joined
5/5/2011
Location
Santa Clarita, CA US
Fantasy
323rd
7/4/2017 1:16pm Edited Date/Time 7/4/2017 1:18pm
Lester wrote:
Consider your audience, which in this case probably has very low IQs. And a general rule here is that you can't question Team Green because he'll...
Consider your audience, which in this case probably has very low IQs. And a general rule here is that you can't question Team Green because he'll point out that you're a minion. Also, I would just point out that I don't think JT$ was attempting a strict scientific methodology here; I'm sure he was being more anecdotal.
"Minion" LaughingLaughing

At least he doesn't start throwing out insults and calling people names.

Post a reply to: Statistics "Number don't lie"

The Latest