Sometimes the Hare Wins

Leading early has never been as predictive of the final outcome as it has been this season.

Consider the statistics. In the 150 games that have produced a clear winner, that winner has led 75% of the time at the 1st change, 76% of the time at the main break, and a startling 89% of the time at the final change. Put another way, only 16 teams have trailed at the final change - by any amount - and gone on to win.

If we exclude slender leads, come-from-behind victories all but vanish. Only 8 teams with a lead of 2 goals or more at quarter time have surrendered that lead, and only 2 teams with a lead of 3 goals or more have done similarly from that point. A lead of 2 goals or more at the main break has been insufficient on only 9 occasions, and a lead of 3 goals or more on only 5 occasions.

No team - not one - has surrendered a three-quarter time lead of 3 goals or more this season, and only 6 teams have lost after leading at the final change by just 1 goal or more.

In an historical context, these statistics are all anomalous, as are the statistics relating to the quarters won by winning teams.

Usually, the teams that win have differentially asserted their dominance in the 3rd or the 4th quarter of games. Whilst winning the 1st or 2nd quarters has always been of some importance, failing to do so has, in years past, not been a significant impediment to victory. This year, however, winning teams have dominated 1st quarters most of all - teams that have taken the competition points have won 75% of 1st terms, but only 67% of 2nd terms, 69% of 3rd terms, and 72% of 4th terms.

Lead early, lead often.

Comments

[Greg]

Any theories on why this might be happening? changes in interchange maybe?

[TC]

I've nothing definitive to offer on this topic, but I think it's at least partly due to the evenness of the teams, so that once a team's in front, probabilistically the most likely outcome is that the team in front maintains its lead.

Alternatively, if the teams are fairly even on an average day then the slightest of advantages on match day could be enough to tip the scales. There's some data to support this view, at least in comparison to last year, since the average lead by the winning team at each quarter break in 2009 was Q1 - 6.7, Q2 - 17.4, Q3 - 25.5 and Q4 - 33.3. This year the average leads have been Q1 - 11.2, Q2 - 18.0, Q3 - 26.3 and Q4 - 35.7, which are greater at every change for this year compared to last, though this is largely due to the much better Q1 performances of winning teams.

In short ... I don't really know, but it seems like a real phenomenon.