Group Stage Results from 2002: The Myth of the Seeds

Discussion in 'USA Men: News & Analysis' started by Serie Zed, Dec 14, 2005.

  1. frenil

    frenil Member

    Mar 11, 2004
    Lund
    How is a statistical analysis of events which occured 4 years ago valid today? Other than creating a entertaining, but irrelevant, conversation.
     
  2. kpaulson

    kpaulson New Member

    Jun 16, 2000
    Washington DC
    You say "stupid", I say "pedantic". It's interesting information.
     
  3. kpaulson

    kpaulson New Member

    Jun 16, 2000
    Washington DC
    The point of the post was that pre-tournament perceptions of team strength have not necessarily been supported by results.

    I don't see how that's irrelevant.

    This analysis won't tell you who will go through-- but it does tell you to have a healthy skepticism for predictions that the two favored teams will go through.
     
  4. ursula

    ursula Member

    Feb 21, 1999
    Republic of Cascadia
    Because people remember what happened in the past and use it to influence what they do in the present. Reputation influences odds.

    Or, to put it another way: What kpaulson said. :)
     
  5. rollo

    rollo Member

    Mar 11, 1999
    San Francisco
    Well said.
     
  6. swedust

    swedust Member+

    Aug 30, 2004
    In France '98, only Spain among the seeds failed to get to the group stage.

    Spain's group (D) was also the only one where the two highest ranked teams did not advance, with Nigeria as the Cinderella.

    (Even then, FIFA ranking was suspect: USA went into May of 1998 at #11, ahead of Italy, Spain, France, Croatia, Romania -- who were a seeded team -- and Denmark, all but one of whom got the the Round of 16.)

    This would appear to be a not-that-great precedent. However, we can only wait before proclaiming WC02 an "abboration" for the performance of unfancied teams. 1998 was the first time the format included 32 teams, and it could well be said that the emerging soccer nations have learned a thing or two about getting out of group stages since then, not to mention having improved by virtue of their top players being imported into the accelerated training of European club football.
     
  7. JohnR

    JohnR Member+

    Jun 23, 2000
    Chicago, IL
    Ursula -

    Yeah, I think you got it. Only thing I'd add is that we aren't the only ones making this analysis. I'd expect that some European bettors haven't completely shrugged off the '02 Cup as being due to the Asian location. So I think the mid- to lower-tier European teams will be only moderately overvalued, not highly overvalued.

    You're definitely right about the last war mentality. To many bettors Cameroon '90 = Nigeria '94/'98 = Senegal '02 = Ghana '06. Thus, Ghana being rated ahead of the U.S. in some places to advance out of the group.
     

Share This Page