Friday, July 22, 2005

World Games stats

Source: Rosters at http://ressourcen.wige-data.de/infosystem/?lang=en&sport_id=16. Germany and Finland list women first. Japan and Canada list men first. US and Australia integrate.

Scores and goal scoring at http://www.wfdf.org/wg2005/scores.htm.

Day 1 completed: Men 1188 goals caught, 156 goals thrown. Women 69 goals caught, 30 goals thrown. (Note: I think this is a 4M/3W game, as rosters are 6M/5F.)

US is about average, with 28% of GC and 18% of GT done by women. Japan is worst, with only 5 GC and 3 GT by women. Totals (please scroll down):

















































































TeamM-GCM-GTW-GCW-GTTotal%W-GC%W-GT
US283211723%28%18%
Canada172816431%48%13%
Austr253212725%32%18%
Japan21235315%19%12%
Finland141811736%44%28%
Germany132314231%52%8%
Totals118156693027%37%16%

14 comments:

heacox said...

Day 1 final standings:

United States 3-0
Australia 3-0
Canada 1-2
Japan 1-2
Finland 1-2
Germany 0-3

Canda lost 14-15 to Australia in the last round of the day. Earlier, they dropped one to the US 8-13. Tomorrow they face Finland and Japan while the US plays Australia and Finland.

parinella said...

US has a pretty even distribution in the goals thrown and caught. Deaver 9-3, Zip 6-6, Eastham 4-8, Chase 6-4. Canada is similarly even. Gak from Australia leads them all with 15-3, followed by Satoshi of Japan with 7-7. Leading female is Sarah from Australia with 4-8 (second is VY of Canada with 2-5).

Flo said...

So here is another case where statistics don't bring you the full picture. I was there coaching the German team, so I had a front seat. And let me tell you (and everyone I talked to agreed to this), the Japanese utilized their women the best of all the teams. It doesn't show in these stats because the women did all the things which don't show: a lot of touches, and tons of breakmarks to isolate the male throwers. It was amazing. They just didn't throw it in the endzone much, and they had a couple very fast and dominant male receivers who caught almost all the goals...

parinella said...

Flo,

Interesting. Were they also taking stats for touches? The UPA page showed complete stats for the US team in the finals. Maybe these stats will appear somewhere.

It's still odd that once in a while one of those breakmarks wouldn't find its way into the endzone, or that the other teams wouldn't force these women to go upfield so they could score some goals.

I find it interesting that there were 25 males but only 1 female that had as many as 12 GT+GC (2 per game), and that the top goal-throwing female had only 5.

Flo said...

Nope,
no other stats taken. The US team took their own stats on a palm, and noone else but maybe the Japanese had enough non players on the sidelines to do this (and I don't recall if the Japanese took stats).
The staff tracked the scoring stats on some nokia cells provided by the fins (from last years worlds).

The Japanese women were rather small (their main handler #11 was maybe 85 pounds, and this is not an understatement). So they weren't necessarily the biggest targets in the endzone. On the other hand, they were too quick to be forced anywhere away from the disc. The Japanese O was some sort of spread with most scores from 25 to 55 yards out, thrown by two stellar throwers (one of them also on the receiving end some times). I think in the bronze game they connected on all but one of these medium-long range shots. And the one that was d'ed was d'ed because the receiver tried to milk it into the endzone. They really knew how to throw it to space. More than likely their game plan was exactly that: move the disc around and wait til one of the two gets an open shot. Simple but hard to defend with only four male defendeders out there.

I think it is pretty standard in high level mixed that the women throw few scores. Once you get close to the endzone and everything gets really crowded, few of them have the tools and the experience to convert consistantly. Most of them come from womens Ultimate, and there the endzone is just so much bigger without all the tall dudes running around. Keeping some of the guys out of the endzone is also a good recipe---more space. This leads to more male assists, but not necessarily fewer male scores: the one guy amongst all the women in the endzone is unguardable.

parinella said...

Flo,

What did the Germans do?

Forgive me if this comes off as sounding sexist or mean, but from your description, a high level mixed team tries to get the women out of the way but will have a plan to punish any opponent who ignores the women.

Tarr said...

That's not how I would characterize Flo's comments. He seems to be saying that a high level mixed team tries to get the male defenders out of the way, and relies on male handlers to make most scoring throws. Nothing about that implies that women get few touches.

parinella said...

Nothing about that implies that women get few touches.
It does imply that the touches are mostly meaningless, bide your time touches.

heacox said...

On the finals' stats:

http://www1.upa.org/files/wg2005/Gold_stats.html

What are the three "unsued" numbers in the Blocks column? Is it just leftover formatting from another catagory, or were there suppossed to be some sort of D designations that didn't get used?

In other news, the US had an overall 95% completion percentage. Impressive. How was the weather last weekend?

Sam TH said...

It does imply that the touches are mostly meaningless, bide your time touches.

Or the the female recievers are catching goals and hucks, but not throwing them. My mixed team certainly uses that strategy plenty, especially since we have several very fast women. Isolating them in the end zone is quite effective.

Flo said...

some comments/clarifications:

what did the germans do?
most our set ups had the women play deeper and the men around the disc. main reason for this was that our women were quite a bit weaker when it comes to throwing deep, and you can't give up the deep game by having too many people without a deep shot behind the disc all the time. We would try to keep the men shorter so the women could finish off the points by themselves. this was often fooled by the other teams through male poaches once we got the disc to the women, and we would then usually reset the disc, leading to a male-to-female score (our stats have about half the scores caught by women, but very few thrown). Off cause we would also play variants of the trade mark german iso o 4-1-2. most times with a guy in the middle since there is a lot more room for error then.

general mixed strategy:
if you mix up women with men all over the field, it will be hard to throw anything floaty to your women (a male poach might get it). limiting the ways you can get the disc to your women limits their cut options and thereby the number of their touches. one strategy can be to split up the field for women and men (left/right, short/deep).
the "sexist" strategy that you mention can be very successful indeed (see hangtime). just compare stats for top level women, men and mixed. womens ultimate has by far the highest number of turn overs, and mixed might have fewer than mens. so isolating your women and having them play alone might not be the best offensive thought.

another possible explanation for the stats:
men's throws are just a little longer on average. even if men and women have the same number of touches (which they don't, see team usa stats), this will lead to more goals thrown by men.

Foxy said...

I kept the stats for Team USA. In general the games moved very fast and we made the decision from the beginning not to try and record all the possible things that Ultistats has the ability to track. That included breakmark throws & Red Zone. We even naively thought that we could track our opponents touches, but quickly realized one point into the first game with Japan that without numbers on the front of the jerseys it would be impossible. It was also impossible to hear all of the calls so many went untracked. I'd say at least 1/3. Another thing I was not able to accurately record was the defense. Many times Canada and Australia would start the point playing a junk zone and then switch to man about 2/3 of the way down the field. Let me know if you have any other questions about the stats. It was exciting to have a reason to be down on the field for all the games. I hope you stats nerds enjoy our efforts.

Foxy said...

What are the three "unsued" numbers in the Blocks column?

The types of blocks are Handblock, Layout & Sky. If I didn't get more specific it was usually a clean interception. There are examples of more specific blocks being recorded in other games.

http://www.upa.org/wg2005/stats

Be sure to check out the play-by-play pages, too.

Hartti said...

I compiled some summary data based on the play-by-play stats (Thanks Elizabeth). Currently I am working on analyzing that data... slowly - I am taking small steps (as much as my daily work and other commitments allow). You can read the progresss reports on my blog.