Yank model: Challenger to the Duckworth/Lewis mode

[yashsr]

Hello everyone,

I and a friend of mine have developed a mathematical cricket model known as 'Yank Model' and have challenged the Duckworth/Lewis method. You can check our website at:
Yank's Model

We've covered plenty of examples in T20 and ODIs in our Comparative Analysis. We've also showed why our model is superior to the D/L and the VJD method and have also pointed the apparent flaws and inconsistencies of the 2 models. We also have done a real match simulation on the Champions League 2010 matches. But we still haven't put up the details on the computation part as we've not completed the process of patenting.

I'd like the cricket fans from Planet Cricket Website to have a look at our model and give us a feedback. I'd urge the readers to just see the situation and guess your own reasonable target before checking the targets of the 3 models - Yank, D/L and VJD, and then judge which is better. I'd urge readers to think in a cricketing manner and not just mathematically. As always, constructive criticisms and comments are welcome! Although we've put up our own comments regarding almost every example, you can always have a different opinion which we'd love to know. One thing I'd like to tell everyone is that I personally believe that our model has no or very little flaws because we've worked for about 4 months and identified flaws in the D/L and the VJD model and created a model accordingly based on real match data. But you're more than welcome to challenge this claim!

Thanks,
Yash

 

[Ollie_H]

Had a look through the site, and it looks like it could be a good model. Would like to see it have more trial runs than just the CLT20, for example trial it over ODI's that happened this year, one's that will happen next year and of course the World Cup next year.

The problem with D/L was that it had never been developed for the new game, as it is a completely different game from what it was 10-15 years ago. With the development of T20 in 2003/4, and then it's launch in 2005 the D/L is outdated for that sort of format.

I think just one trial series is not enough to gain full reliability on it, but is definitely a good start.

 

[TumTum]

Where can I find the model? (Couldn't find it in your site)

 

[Ollie_H]

They don't show the specific model, but check out their CLT20 demo.

 

[AbhishekS]

This looks very good. I spent around 30 minutes analyzing it and I can easily say that YANK's method is much fairer than the D/L method.

 

[yashsr]

Where can I find the model? (Couldn't find it in your site)

Check out our website at Yank's Model and then browse through all the sections

@Ollie_H - Yes we'll be simulating more tournaments in the near future... World Cup 2011 for sure.. D/L does release updates about every 2 years but it still fails to understand the acceleration level in shorter formats like T20...In ODIs its kind of good but still in some cases it gives weird targets according to us...

@Yudi - Thanks for your feedback

 

[TumTum]

Check out our website at Yank's Model and then browse through all the sections

Thanks but I rather see the actually algorithm rather than examples, because as far as I know you could have plucked those numbers from anywhere

 

[yashsr]

Thanks but I rather see the actually algorithm rather than examples, because as far as I know you could have plucked those numbers from anywhere

Our patenting process isn't complete so we cannot put up the details on technical part. However, it is foolish to assume that we'd do so much work on our web-site and lots of research if we were plucking numbers from anywhere.

 

[Ollie_H]

D/L does release updates about every 2 years

That is something I never knew. And will be the one thing that I learn today, I still like the way you have gone about your testing and designing of the algorithm and tested it out so far.

Out of interest I saw that you had been tweeting it to cricket players, past-players & pundits, how did they respond?

 

[Gaurav_7]

CLT20 simulation seems interesting, I mean the overall aggregate of runs by Yank method and DL method. Any chance we could see some of the scores of the rain affected matches by Yank method? I mean just to see how it is different from DL method and what scores we get.

 

[King Cricket]

The "Partnership Concept" really looks to be something pretty innovative, and the same goes with how you've taken into consideration both overs and wickets while making projections. Continue with the trials, hopefully we'll see more positive results.

King Cricket added 5 Minutes and 51 Seconds later...

Any chance we could see some of the scores of the rain affected matches by Yank method?

You do have it towards the bottom of the "ODI Cricket Comparative Analysis section". You have some matches of the 2003 and 1992 World Cup, and a Bangladesh vs New Zealand ODI.

 

[Haarithan]

Wow saw that CLT20 thing which really has impressed me . As it is, D/L method has failed to device a step that takes into account the acceleration of the batting side after 10 overs which has eventually provided low scores/targets after 20 overs from their case . This one seems to be much more accurate considering it gives a difference of only 92 from the actual and yank calculator's total .

 

[khalek]

Good work, looks promising. Keep us updated

 

[pcfan123]

D/L is the best system

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

well, I like the idea, and your projections certainly look better a lot of the time.

however, bit of creative maths on the T20 projected scores.

in a few cases D/L has under projected scores and yours has over projected them. This has led to you saying, for an actual score of 150 where YANK has given 166 and D/L has given 134, "YANK is -16" and "D/L is 16"

that's fair enough, however, when you've totalled the differences you've used the under projections as positives and the under projections negatives. This has meant, the D/L, which more often under projects than your system was out by 309 and your system which over-projects a little more is only out by 92. Doing it this way the YANK looks massively superior.

but imo, the above example of YANK over-projected by 16 and D/L under-projecting by 16 is all one and the same. It's still wrong by 16.

I did the calculations again, taking out the negatives and found overall, your system to be out by 502 runs overall and D/L out by 523. This means your system is on average wrong by 22.8 runs a match, and D/L is out by 23.7 Runs a match.

However, far more worrying, the standard deviation for D/L is actually lower than yours

YANK Standard Deviation = 28.19
D/L Standard Deviation = 24.62

so actually, D/L might under-project a bit more but is more consistently returning closer scores.

However I will grant you that your system has been more harshly punished by the extreme data in the table (the wayamba collapse game) and taking out all scores where both systems were 30+ out they even out at 19.

Still doesn't make your system that much better in T20, and the maths you've used to suggest it is either deliberately misleading, or just bad.