Do advanced stats really tell the story?
View Single Post
08-30-2013, 12:10 PM
Join Date: Mar 2003
Originally Posted by
As someone with a degree in Physics, you can spare me the definition of momentum. But if you want to develop p=mv, if something happens that makes players play "bigger" (change in "psychological mass"), and makes players play/execute with less hesitation than their opponents (change in "psychological velocity" - even if only relatively), how could the result NOT be expressed as a change in "psychological momentum"? But I obviously digress...
You can't win a game psychologically with confidence alone. It has to manifest itself physically in some way to impact the actual game flow, and that's why I submit that the way "momentum" is used in this context precludes relegation to "slang" level by overly linear thinkers who think they've got it figured out better by referring to it with the nebulous definition of a "phenomenon related in some way to confidence".
Your argument is self defeating when you base it on fictional terms such as "psychological mass" and "psychological velocity".
As someone with a degree in physics I would expect you to apply the scientific method to your theory.....
There are studies of the stock market that directly relate confidence to momentum. In these studies mass = volume and velocity = rate of change. You will find that this is a very clear parallel to the relation between confidence and "momentum" in the sporting world. The effect is almost identical as "momentum" can spiral out of control in direct relation to confidence or the lack thereof. This only changes when there is an event to change the buyers/sellers confidence in the company........sound familiar?
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Estimated_Prophet