I agree with you here Justin. In statistics sampling, one cannot choose data selectively (in this case choosing Surdiman Cup because China has hosted it more). The only valid reason for narrowing the data selection to Surdiman Cups only is if the hypothesis is “Homeground advantage is irrelevant in Surdiman Cups”, which is not the case here since we are talking about homeground advantage in a general sense. Other than that, Kwun’s post above summarises my thoughts. I do think there is homeground advantage, but it cannot be empirically proven by statistics. Neither does it apply only to China, I did think that the fact that the MS and MD finals of AG last year being all-Indonesian affairs were contributed slightly by home advantage.
You can't infer causation from an observational study, if you took a second or maybe even first year statistics course you'd know this. There are simply too many variables to account for, and 13 tournaments is far too few for the central limit theorem to apply. If we look at all badminton matches and compare home success to away success, then maybe we'd have enough data to start drawing meaningful conclusions.
If you knew which courses I took, and what I do for a living, I suspect you wouldn't write this. You're mixing things: this is not 13 tournaments. This record is 98+5 = 103 matches in China vs 86+19 = 105 matches outside China.
I'd still write it, maybe I'd just be more concerned about your statement though. And my apologies, looking back you were discussing 10 tournaments, not 13, so thanks for the correction. My statement is still valid in principle however - 10 tournaments is an insufficient sample size to convince me. I do think that we can analyze past matches and determine if there's a home court advantage, but we can't do so by only looking at the Sudirman cup. Unless we get very, very detailed.
Obviously, somebody couldn't resist the urge to chime in and mentioned me indirectly but adding nothing that has not already been said in different words by others. Clearly he has an axe to grind with me, well...I trust discerning readers here are fully aware of what he's up to here. Incidentally, Team JPN was never bothered by any home advantage, not mentioned at all as far as I know either before or after the Sudirman Cup. In fact, as I've said elsewhere, Momota had declared Team JPN is there to wrest the title from CHN at Nanning. That showed how determined and confident they were, the champion's mindset, who cares about home advantage. Many thanks especially to @kwun, @rhoder, and @BThane for their valuable contributions to a fruitful and constructive debate, and my appreciation to @Head Heavy despite our disagreements.
There seems to be some confusion still. I claimed that the 98-5 and 86-19 records are significantly different: 10 is not the sample size. This can be quantified like here, by testing if two binomial distributions are statistically different from each other, with the following data. In Group 1, we have 98+5=103 matches in China, of which 98 are wins for China. In Group 2, we have 86+19=105 matches outside China, of which 86 are wins for China. For those who are familiar with statistics and the notations of the previous link, the z-score is 2.99 This tells me that the two records are indeed significantly different, but feel free to run your favourite test: for the record, I also did Fisher's exact test By the way, there is a long literature on home advantage for various sports: see for instance this 2018 article published in the Annals of Applied Statistics, especially the nice Fig. 5 p21 which shows the home advantage, depending on the (North-American) sport and the franchise.
Who in here ever said that Team JPN was ever bothered by playing away games? This is again all your own interpretation of people's post here. The only thing I get from here was that CHN team playing in CHN had the home advantage and that showed in their performance and team spirit in the tournament. Then you took it as an offense somehow then went all defensive with statistic or reasoning. No body actually cared about it, as you said, but yourself. Also, it's funny how you said about fruitful and constructive debate because I saw none of it. All you did was ignoring everyone else's post that you thought disagreeing with you and just kept repeating yourself over and over. You may think everyone out there is trying to get to you, but the truth is you always twisted things people say and making them the "bad" people and you are the only one who is willing to accept the difference by being "understanding" and not "biased". Maybe if you have time to write long posts you should spare some time to read your own posts too. That somebody mentioned in that post of yours was actually right. Obviously you are too oblivious to your own role in the discussion to grasp what's been said.
Some interesting articles on home advantage : https://www.sportingnews.com/us/oth...onocos-mlb-nba-nhl/1xio6320kqfb51q28da09zdlyl - however,it's all about team sports like soccer, basketball, hockey, American football, baseball. The wikipedia article on home advantage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_advantage (unfortunately, nothing on badminton, specifically) However,you have to ask yourself how much of it is applicable to badminton in general, all the team and individual events. This one catches my attention https://www.skysports.com/football/...rts-bust-common-football-myths-home-advantage Sky Sports bust common football myths: Home advantage? And another one https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-home-playoff-game-is-a-big-advantage-unless-you-play-hockey/ " In general, home advantage is a subject that deserves more research, simply because we’re still not entirely sure what combination of factors actually cause it. Some, like crowd noise, are obvious, while others are written into the sport’s rules (home hockey teams have the right to make the final line change before the puck drops, giving them a consistent edge in matchups). Other phenomena, like the home team getting preferential treatment by officials, still need further study. But numbers like the ones in the table above show that each sport brings its own weird nuggets to the overall topic of home-field/court/ice." For advanced readers https://www.researchgate.net/public...f_studies_on_the_advantage_of_playing_at_home dated November 1999 (outdated?) Another more recent article dated Aug 2013 https://www.researchgate.net/public...vidence_Causes_and_Psychological_Implications Home Advantage and Individual Sports The prevalence of home advantage both in individ- ual sports and in unbalanced competitions is less clear. Some evidences for home advantage has been identified in cross-country running (McCutch- eon, 1984), wrestling (Gayton & Langevin, 1992; McAndrew, 1992), World Cup alpine skiing (Bray & Carron, 1993), speed skating (Koning, 2005) and boxing (Balmer, Nevill, & Lane, 2005). By contrast, once the quality of the athletes has been accounted for, home advantage was not found to be a major influence on performance in individual “grand slam” tennis or “major” golf tournaments (Nevill et al., 1997). Team vs. Individual Sports Home Advantage More recent studies suggest that home advantage is a multifactorial phenomenon with many unknown aspects. ...In fact, home advantage seems to be associated with sports’ discipline. Thus, Balmer,Nevill, and Williams (2003) analysed the Summer Olympic Games and found that team sports, which have higher spectator attendance and subjectively judged sports, like gymnastics or boxing, yielded higher performance at home. However, objectively judged sports, like athletics or weightlifting, did not show home advantage....
Excuse,madam, how old are you? Why are you always so personal with me? Instead of addressing the points of my arguments, you butt in now and then with ad hominem attacks, petty and childish remarks, and being too presumptuous with me. Hey, I've been quite indulgent with you. Stop it ! One more time, I'll take it that you're trolling me.
Look who's talking. Whatever. Take it however you want. If you can't understand what I have been saying or why then it's no use arguing with you. You will never try to read or understand anyway. It's impossible to have any rational discussion with you especially when it's anything about the great and flawless China.
It's already one week and the debating is still not over. MOVE ON, everyone! The debating is too long already. Why not discussing about Australia Open?
concur. just agree to disagree. there has been some insightful discussion so far. but once ppl start getting personal, then it just deteriorate from there.
