IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpanxx/v20y2020i5p857-869.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Almost a lottery: the influence of team strength on success in penalty shootouts

Author

Listed:
  • Fabian Wunderlich
  • Felix Berge
  • Daniel Memmert
  • Robert Rein

Abstract

Three aspects of penalty shootouts that have not been examined in the literature so far are 1) the influence of overall team strength on penalty success, 2) the viability of a forecasting model for penalty shootouts, and 3) the existence of a penalty-specific home advantage. To this end, a sample consisting of 1067 penalty shootouts from 14 cup competitions was investigated. Team strength was estimated based on betting odds and results show that stronger teams win significantly more shootouts compared to weaker teams. A forecasting model, based on an out-of-sample approach, suggests that the effect of team strength on success is rather small as the winning probability remains around 40% even for very weak teams against very strong teams. Thus, for weaker teams it seems advantageous to focus on drawing a game against stronger teams as their probability of success is much greater during a penalty shootout compared to normal game play. In contrast to the robust evidence of a home advantage during normal game play the results further indicate an absence for a home (or away) advantage during penalty shootouts. The results presented are therefore highly valuable for coaches in supporting clear tactical recommendations.

Suggested Citation

  • Fabian Wunderlich & Felix Berge & Daniel Memmert & Robert Rein, 2020. "Almost a lottery: the influence of team strength on success in penalty shootouts," International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 857-869, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpanxx:v:20:y:2020:i:5:p:857-869
    DOI: 10.1080/24748668.2020.1799171
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/24748668.2020.1799171
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/24748668.2020.1799171?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rpanxx:v:20:y:2020:i:5:p:857-869. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPAN20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.