[HN Gopher] For soccer players, the less brain they use, the bet...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       For soccer players, the less brain they use, the better for penalty
       kicks
        
       Author : pseudolus
       Score  : 96 points
       Date   : 2021-05-23 11:00 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.cbc.ca)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.cbc.ca)
        
       | mrfusion wrote:
       | On the other hand, would you want to involve as much brain as
       | possible during practice?
        
         | klyrs wrote:
         | Perfect practice makes perfect. It _is_ important to think and
         | analyze, to correct bad habits. But once you 've got the basics
         | down, you then need to learn to let go and trust muscle memory.
         | If you jump straight into "don't overthink it" while you're
         | still making newbie mistakes, then practice is actually harmful
         | and will impede further skill development
        
       | jollybean wrote:
       | This is known I think.
       | 
       | If you 'think' about how you 'walk across the room' - you don't
       | do it naturally.
       | 
       | You don't 'win' during the 'game' - you 'win' during practice,
       | when you are teaching your body all of the skills, and how to
       | score like a walk across the room.
       | 
       | There's nothing you can do at 'game time' but to literally let
       | your subconscious use what it's learned.
       | 
       | Golf is I think the game with the most subtle and minute aspects
       | to that, and you can see the players are so keen on ritual,
       | consistency, routine. 'Everything in it's right place' before the
       | match and you're thinking is calm.
        
       | Thorentis wrote:
       | I think this is one of those "when you start thinking about it,
       | you mess up" scenarios that I encounter with plenty of things.
       | Like when playing a piece of piano music from memory - as soon as
       | I start trying to think about which notes come next, I make
       | mistakes and sometimes even have mental blanks and need to take a
       | break before "remembering" again.
        
         | hamandcheese wrote:
         | Is it possible that the causality is reversed? Maybe you start
         | thinking because your subconscious brain doesn't know what to
         | do next.
        
           | taneq wrote:
           | If that were so then putting someone else off their game by
           | drawing their attention to a particular aspect of their game
           | and making them self conscious would be less effective.
        
           | mbreese wrote:
           | Not the parent, but no. Once you're playing music from
           | memory, your brain already knows the notes/fingering/etc.
           | It's that when you start thinking, you get out of the "flow".
           | Too much thinking will pull you right out and then you need
           | to work to get back in it.
        
             | dnh44 wrote:
             | A few years ago a replayed an old video game that I hadn't
             | played since childhood. There are a few parts of the game
             | that were quite difficult and involved a fairly complicated
             | sequence of events, one of them being the final boss
             | battle.
             | 
             | When I got to the boss I remembered the battle being quite
             | complicated and intense but I couldn't remember where to
             | move, when to jump, or when to attack. But after a few
             | tries as if by magic my fingers took over and executed the
             | sequence of buttons flawlessly. It was amazing because I
             | didn't consciously know what came next but my fingers did.
             | I also felt a sense of euphoria as the memory came back to
             | me; it was a really interesting thing to experience.
        
         | globular-toast wrote:
         | Yep, I get this with guitar and signing too. If I think about
         | it too much my voice tightens up and I'll start missing notes.
         | The same thing with dancing. I realised long ago that I'm not
         | naturally good at these things because I find it impossible to
         | switch off my brain. When I dance I'm thinking "which direction
         | should I move in" when should I spin my partner" etc. Ask
         | anyone who dances how they know the answers to these questions
         | and they can't tell you. They just don't think about it.
        
           | Glide wrote:
           | This is so true.
           | 
           | It's especially true when a dance floor is crowded or it's
           | harder to listen to the music. It's harder to "cut loose" if
           | one or two restrictions are going on.
           | 
           | For dancing, a couple things helped me out. Repetition and
           | practice. Practicing whole movements together, e.g. footwork
           | with the lead, there is a strong relationship between
           | footwork and your ability to gently exert force and
           | direction. Sure I learned a tuck turn to counts, but I never
           | think about the count of it when leading it, it is engrained
           | into the overall movement I want to execute.
           | 
           | There's an interesting phenomenon that happens at dance
           | events with a heavy teaching component. The first night of
           | dancing is pretty good and when lessons go underway the level
           | of the room slightly drops because people are trying new
           | things. Incorporating new things would do that and it
           | happens, albeit awkwardly.
        
       | acituan wrote:
       | Misleading title, the study didn't demonstrate anything about the
       | _amount_ of brain activity, but the locale of brain activity.
       | From the study;
       | 
       | > Players who were successful under pressure showed most of their
       | activity in the motor cortex of the brain. This is the part of
       | the brain active during movement.
       | 
       | > Players who were unsuccessful showed elevated activity in the
       | pre-frontal cortex and left temporal cortex areas of the brain.
       | 
       | If anything, this demonstrates the difference between
       | "computational cognition" vs "embodied cognition", latter being
       | more adaptive in this particular task.
       | 
       | That said, I find the explanation of the researchers dubious; we
       | don't know if doing prefrontal computation is _hampering_ motor
       | performance or it is simply trying to _compensate_ a deficiency
       | in the _procedural knowledge_ of the player. Considering the fact
       | that half of the participants were selected from inexperienced
       | players, and the average participant age was around 22, the
       | latter is the more likely explanation.
        
       | h0nd wrote:
       | It does not only apply for penalty kicks. I encountered this
       | situation on the pitch regularly, especially when I had time
       | instead of pressure. Same in table tennis. I tend to make
       | unforced errors the more time I got.
        
       | iamben wrote:
       | If you haven't read it, "The Inner Game of Tennis" by W. Timothy
       | Gallway (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Inner-Game-Tennis-ultimate-
       | performa...) is worth a go.
       | 
       | Whilst it's _technically_ a tennis coaching book, the tennis is
       | really just an example to explain bigger things.
       | 
       | Anyway, there's a great story in that book where he says
       | something like "if you want to put someone off their game,
       | compliment them on how strong their backhand [or whatever] is
       | today. From then on they'll think about it before every stroke
       | and destroy their own performance."
        
         | finiteseries wrote:
         | Soccer/football coach Thomas Tuchel, previously at BVB & PSG
         | and now at Chelsea is pretty well known for handing out copies
         | of that book to his players.
        
         | coupdejarnac wrote:
         | I heard this a long time ago, and it has always struck me as
         | nonsense. Sure, mindgames are useful, but for elite athletes
         | technique is second nature. In soccer, you're better off
         | telling someone their sister is a whore (ie Materazzi to
         | Zidane), kicking them in the heels, or exaggerating contact.
         | Maybe complementing someone works better in individual sports
         | like golf or tennis, but even then I think it would only work
         | on the naive. I've gotten compliments in the middle of soccer
         | games, and I usually laugh them off. I can't imagine being
         | fooled with that sort of amateurish tactic.
        
         | dmoy wrote:
         | My coach for a sport that is completely unrelated to tennis has
         | me read that book. It is generally applicable, I agree.
        
         | muzani wrote:
         | This is a golden recommendation, exactly what I was looking
         | for. Thanks so much!
        
         | stephenhuey wrote:
         | That definitely happens to me. Additional thoughts go through a
         | pro player's head during penalty kicks. 11 years ago I was
         | fascinated by a short Freakonomics podcast. The data shows that
         | the best chance of scoring is to kick it straight down the
         | center to the keeper. However, most people won't do this even
         | though their odds are better since the pain of kicking it to a
         | keeper who does not dive to the side and instead catches your
         | ball is far greater than not scoring!
         | 
         | https://freakonomics.com/2010/06/14/what-to-do-with-your-pen...
        
           | im3w1l wrote:
           | Scientific studies also show that "rock" is the best throw in
           | rock-paper-scissor*. Always shooting center is as ridiculous
           | as always throwing "rock".
           | 
           | * Rock and scissor are both thrown at 35%, with paper at
           | 29.6%. The article suggests throwing paper to exploit that,
           | but that makes no sense, since you will win 35% lose 35% and
           | draw 29.6%. Rock on the other hand wins at 35%, draw 35% and
           | lose 29.6% https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-blame-
           | game/20150...
        
             | schaefer wrote:
             | In a one time throw against a complete stranger, okay. But
             | your friends will notice that you always throw rock, and
             | you start to lose 100% of the time.
        
           | cutemonster wrote:
           | Also, if people started doing that, soon it would work no
           | more
        
           | ajuc wrote:
           | > the best chance of scoring is to kick it straight down the
           | center to the keeper.
           | 
           | it's called "panenka" after a player that used to do this in
           | high-stakes games to rub it in. You have to fake your run-up
           | well - otherwise good keepers will notice the difference in
           | run-up and make you look like an idiot [1]
           | 
           | I don't think it's the best chance. Panenkas are about 50-50
           | and normal penalties are about 70%-30%. And most of that 30%
           | is missing the goal completely. If you go hard either side
           | and don't miss the goal it's almost 100% no matter if the
           | keeper dives the right way.
           | 
           | Then there are strikers like Lewandowski who wait for keeper
           | to decide and go the other way [2]. This is all about
           | developing a subconscious routine and doing it mechanically
           | without thinking. You have no time to consciously process the
           | data and choose the other side.
           | 
           | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWBBlpyDfUI [2]
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrXoQKmZui8
        
             | sk0g wrote:
             | While I don't have the stats to back the latter part up,
             | the expected goal (xG) from a penalty kick is .76 - 76% of
             | penalties end up being scored. Keepers quite often will
             | guess right, and at that point both the placement and power
             | have to be perfect. If they are, it's a goal practically
             | every time, but most players will compromise on either
             | placement or power.
             | 
             | This may be different in recreational contexts, as
             | professional keepers dive frighteningly quickly, and are
             | very good at reading the body language of the PK taker.
        
             | jogjayr wrote:
             | A Panenka is a specific type of penalty through the center.
             | It's a sort of chip/scoop shot and it goes really slow. It
             | makes the keeper look foolish if it comes off. But it's
             | slow enough that even a keeper diving to one side has a
             | chance to recover, as seen in the video you shared.
             | 
             | But there's also the option of taking a normal run-up and
             | blasting it straight down the middle. No keeper is going to
             | be able read that since there's nothing to disguise. And if
             | they dive, it's going too fast for the keeper to recover
             | and save.
             | 
             | The keeper is biased toward action. If they just stand in
             | the center and don't dive they'll be blamed for not even
             | trying. So a hard, fast penalty down the center has pretty
             | good odds of succeeding.
        
         | paul_f wrote:
         | Malcolm Gladwell wrote about this in his brilliant essay - The
         | Art of Failure. "When Jana Novotna faltered at Wimbledon, it
         | was because she began thinking about her shots again. She lost
         | her fluidity, her touch."
         | https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2000/08/21/the-art-of-fai...
        
         | caenorst wrote:
         | and is there any advices in this book to avoid focusing on the
         | technique in important moment? I used to play foosball
         | competitively and this used to eat me when I started to doubt
         | about my technique.
        
           | iamben wrote:
           | Yeah, the whole book is pretty much about learning to _do_
           | instinctively. You can pick up a second hand copy for very
           | little. It 's worth a read!
        
       | fnord77 wrote:
       | this seems like "Zen and the art of Archery" stuff
        
       | vagrantJin wrote:
       | I'm going to press X to doubt since this looks like a load. Too
       | many variables missing up to and including a player just not
       | being good at spot kicks despite their obvious technical ability.
        
       | solids wrote:
       | This kind of experiments always make me think why we experience
       | consciousness, and where is the evolutionary advantage of having
       | it at all.
        
         | finiteseries wrote:
         | Blindsight by Peter Watts for a fun book in this direction.
        
         | Bayart wrote:
         | To put it in computer terms : it's the same reason why we have
         | task-specific hardware _and_ general purpose hardware and
         | software. The more a task reoccurs, the more you benefit from a
         | _device_ dedicated to the task. And the more heterogeneous your
         | workload is, the more you benefit from broadly defined non-
         | specialized capabilities.
         | 
         | In that respect, the beauty of the human brain is that it can
         | go from one to the other depending on your habits.
        
         | xyzelement wrote:
         | There are some things you can do better on instinct and some
         | things you need to be conscious.
         | 
         | Shooting penalty kicks falls into the former. Organizing the
         | soccer match into the later :)
         | 
         | Even on the instinctual level, you need consciousness to hone
         | your instincts. For example things like physical therapy or
         | even athletic training are conscious interventions to reshape
         | your instinct. The best penalty kickers in the world likely
         | made a conscious choice at some point to practice these kicks
         | until their good form became habitual.
        
       | drumhead wrote:
       | The best penalty taker I ever saw was Alan Shearer(English
       | Footballer). He's just pick his spot and smash it as hard as he
       | could. He was very successful.
        
       | vxNsr wrote:
       | A great book on this subject is Chatter[0] by Ethan Kross, he
       | talks about how our inner voice can often be our own worst enemy
       | and also suggests ways to combat it.
       | 
       | https://smile.amazon.com/Chatter-Voice-Head-Matters-Harness-...
        
       | mrbonner wrote:
       | Anybody remember the "last samurai"? : "too many minds" when they
       | parry.
        
       | Ologn wrote:
       | There was a paper in Nature where scientists did magnetic imaging
       | of the brain of grandmaster chess players, as well as of advanced
       | amateur players.
       | 
       | They found that when evaluating a move, for grandmasters the
       | frontal and parietal cortices had gamma bursts, whereas for
       | amateurs the medial temporal lobe had gamma bursts. This tends to
       | indicate that when grandmasters evaluate a move they are
       | accessing their memory, whereas an amateur evaluating a move is
       | reasoning about it.
       | 
       | I would guess that the same holds true in soccer.
       | 
       | https://www.nature.com/articles/35088119
        
       | snvzz wrote:
       | Random obvious statement: For the same task and results, the less
       | brain used the better.
       | 
       | It means your brain is more efficient. More headroom.
       | 
       | I take the story's just an example of what this means in
       | practice.
        
       | SnowProblem wrote:
       | A slight tangent, but it's amazing what the human mind can do in
       | the background. We've all had this experience driving - an
       | amazingly complex task - where you get to your destination you
       | forget how you got there. Well, the best freestyle rapper in the
       | world right now is similar and on YouTube: Harry Mack. Before
       | going on with your day, I promise it's worth your time to check
       | him out: https://youtu.be/U6dbmuCfdyk?t=753. He's amazing. In
       | other videos, he breaks down how he does what he does, and so
       | much of his rap is automatic. This is the only way. He's thinking
       | 2 or 3 bars ahead at all times while speaking what's been
       | decided. He's trying to remember key words and string together
       | stories and structure, while at the same time letting his
       | background processes create the rhythm and specifics. What
       | talent.
        
       | binbag wrote:
       | Trying so hard not to make a quip about footballers finding
       | "thinking less" very easy...
        
         | eplanit wrote:
         | Humor aside, it does raise a legitimate question regarding
         | stereotypes -- there may be very good (biological,
         | psychological) reasons that correlate athleticism with not-so-
         | impressive cognitive skills.
        
       | sys_64738 wrote:
       | Unfortunately PK takers are human too so they can get psych'd out
       | by the goalkeeper who steps towards them to delay the time to
       | take the PK. Probably a more important stat is how many PKs are
       | scored the longer the ball sits on the penalty circle? As the
       | feeling is that the longer it is the more likely the PK taker
       | will bottle it and hit it over the bar.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | yawaworht1978 wrote:
       | It is the same principle for tennis players when they do a down
       | the line forehand passing shot from running, it is all muscle
       | memory, it is one of the shots that has higher chances of missing
       | if the player gets too much time to think about it.
        
       | weinzierl wrote:
       | I guess every musician knows this as well: You are in the perfect
       | flow, groovin' along, you know what I mean, and then the moment
       | you start thinking... you mess up.
       | 
       | Sometimes I like to believe the mastery of consciously shifting
       | attention to some part while not disturbing the other tracks that
       | run subconsciously in your head is one distinguishing feature of
       | the real virtuoso.
        
         | tgv wrote:
         | In music, "conscious" thinking deteriorates performance,
         | because you'll be too late. It adds at least 100ms, but often
         | more (note: there are explanations that model the delay as
         | extra processing, or as interference, or as inhibition), so
         | you'll drop out of the rhythm in no time. It also messes up
         | fast fingering, so you'll be out of tune as well. Motor
         | functions are really time sensitive. Try to write a word while
         | thinking what your fingers have to do to move the pen...
         | 
         | I'm not sure this study shows this, though. Lesser activity may
         | be caused by other effects, e.g. because they're better
         | trained, they can set up the motor program (which is often
         | ballistic) in less time. There's also an account where accuracy
         | is linked to larger ensembles of neurons firing simultaneously,
         | so inaccuracy might look the same as prolonged activity.
        
       | commiepatrol wrote:
       | So this man is a genius? https://youtu.be/o8cZmeZnmc4
        
       | squarefoot wrote:
       | Hardly surprising since penalties are very easy to score if the
       | player hits the ball properly and the keeper doesn't move before
       | the kick (which would trigger a penalty repeat).
       | 
       | There's one rule to score a penalty 100% of times: keep the ball
       | ground level and aim near one of the goal posts base. If the
       | kicker doesn't screw up, then it's a goal, no matter how good and
       | well trained is the keeper: there's just not enough time to go
       | there, that's why the secret is keeping the ball low: you can
       | fight gravity with a strong high or lateral jump, but you can't
       | help gravity by adding more force to the gravity pulling you
       | down. Once this has become automatic, the player only has to keep
       | cold and ignore the keeper, which naturally will do anything to
       | distract him, therefore it's only a matter of making the thing
       | automatic and don't think about it. Mental coaching, which
       | recently has become a thing in football too, can help with this.
        
       | notahacker wrote:
       | The flip side of this is that some of the best elite penalty
       | takers essentially outthink the opposing goalkeeper. The safest
       | penalty is placed slightly to the opposite side to the one the
       | keeper dives to, which has plenty of margin for error (and if the
       | keeper doesn't move early they're not saving anything that isn't
       | down the middle)
       | 
       | Smashing a ball into the top corner [without needing to think
       | about it] is also unsaveable and popular with elite penalty
       | takers, but the margin for error in how you actually kick the
       | ball is smaller: a slight miscue and your penalty is off target
       | (or a "nice height" for a keeper that reads where you're
       | shooting).
        
         | allendoerfer wrote:
         | > Smashing a ball into the top corner [without needing to think
         | about it] is also unsaveable and popular with elite penalty
         | takers, but the margin for error in how you actually kick the
         | ball is smaller: a slight miscue and your penalty is off target
         | (or a "nice height" for a keeper that reads where you're
         | shooting).
         | 
         | I like the fact, that penalties on the sides of the goal above
         | a height of about 1,5m are unsaveable (you do not even have to
         | hit the corner), but still world-class players miss, because
         | they get nervous, so they often do not dare to just do that. It
         | should be a game like tic tac toe: Totally solved, the keeper
         | should lose every round, but yet he does not. Makes the game
         | human.
        
         | JoeAltmaier wrote:
         | In fact, don't "down the middle" kicks succeed more often?
        
         | canuckintime wrote:
         | > and if the keeper doesn't move early they're not saving
         | anything that isn't down the middle
         | 
         | Most penalties are poorly taken. I hate seeing a keeper dive
         | early to a random side only to be beaten by a weak shot down
         | the middle. I assume that keepers don't have faith in their
         | nerves/reactions and thus have to force their bodies to dive
         | before the shot is taken. Otherwise the best strategy for the
         | keeper is to wait for the shot
        
           | daleharvey wrote:
           | Have you considered that the few people who have managed to
           | rise to the top of one of the most competitive fields in the
           | world, as well as the clubs who have have many millions of
           | pounds depending on the result of a penalty kick ... may
           | possibly be better at taking penalty kicks, and are more
           | aware of the best strategy than yourself?
        
             | hogFeast wrote:
             | Welcome to HN. You see these kind of posts on every topic
             | (I have had first-hand knowledge of a certain event, and
             | you come on here and someone will tell you with authority
             | that you are wrong...and actually X/Y/Z happened...this
             | place is very unique).
             | 
             | What people also underestimate is how hard professionals
             | hit the ball, without looking like they are hitting it
             | hard. I had a relatively hard shot, I have injured GKs in
             | pens, I trained with a guy who was once a reserve keeper
             | for a lower division professional side (retired a few
             | years)...I didn't come close to scoring because my shots
             | were nowhere near hard enough. Free kicks are the same, you
             | see the shot in slow-mo, it looks like they are swatting
             | the ball softly...in reality, their technique is so
             | good/efficient that they are crushing it whilst aiming it
             | carefully.
             | 
             | Most professional clubs employ people who just look at
             | penalties. They look at techniques, they look at
             | strategies...saying that the keeper should wait for the
             | ball when it is going 70mph and you have under 100ms to
             | decide is...ludicrous.
        
               | canuckintime wrote:
               | C'mon, I literally said the same conclusion that keeper's
               | reactions aren't good enough.
               | 
               | > I assume that keepers don't have faith in their
               | nerves/reactions and thus have to force their bodies to
               | dive before the shot is taken.
        
               | hogFeast wrote:
               | Yes, and I am saying no-one has reactions that fast.
               | Professionals hit the ball 70-80mph...up the chain
               | someone said that keepers should just wait and see where
               | it is going: this isn't humanly possible, there isn't
               | enough time.
               | 
               | What they do is: statistical analysis of every penalty
               | taker to see what preference they have (what corner, what
               | they do home/away, what they do when they are facing a
               | goal at a certain end, etc.) and most professional
               | goalkeepers are pretty much experts in watching how
               | players run up to the ball, how the taker's eyes move,
               | how they position their body, how they position their
               | non-striking leg (and strikers counter this: you will
               | notice that most professional takers will look at the
               | ball when they put it down, turn away from the keeper
               | when they walk back, usually keep looking at the ball or
               | directly at the keeper before they start running, and not
               | look away from the ball when running up...there are
               | reasons for this). And clubs will analyse videos of taker
               | tendencies, and keeper tendencies.
        
               | canuckintime wrote:
               | We're talking at cross purposes. See here:
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27256085
               | 
               | Also fwiw just because > Most professional clubs employ
               | people who just look at penalties. They look at
               | techniques, they look at strategies < doesn't always
               | result in professionals choosing the best technique or
               | strategy. Here's an example:
               | 
               | https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/08/sports/ncaabasketball/
               | und...
        
               | arcturus17 wrote:
               | You and the parent you are replying to are right - pro
               | clubs know the ins and outs of penalties and select and
               | train players (keepers and takers) accordingly.
               | 
               | You are being distracted from the meat and bones of the
               | argument though - the whole premise that most penalties
               | are poorly taken is blatantly wrong. Most penalties end
               | up in goals - which is how it's intended to be.
        
               | hogFeast wrote:
               | Yes, goal frequency is 75-85% in professional play.
               | Amazing but it shows how much skill takers have (players
               | like Baines, Henry, and more recently Fernandes are over
               | 90%...which is just crazy).
        
               | canuckintime wrote:
               | By poorly taken, I mean aesthetics not effectiveness. See
               | here:
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27256085
        
               | daleharvey wrote:
               | If the goals were smaller and most penalties did not
               | result in goal that would not mean they are poorly taken.
               | 
               | These people are obviously the best in the world at what
               | they do, they are picked specifically and paid generously
               | in order to be able to kick a ball into a net. Discussing
               | casually how they could improve without any apparent
               | indepth knowledge is a level of hubris that hackers news
               | is known for breeding.
        
               | arcturus17 wrote:
               | > If the goals were smaller and most penalties did not
               | result in goal
               | 
               | Then they arguably wouldn't be penalties.
               | 
               | But there's no need to argue with me, I've been watching
               | football for some odd 30 years and playing for a good
               | subset of that. It has never occurred to me that
               | penalties are taken poorly at the pro level - I've seen
               | absolute dross at the amateur level, but I concur that
               | most pro penalty takers are phenomenal, both from a
               | statistical and aesthetical perspective. Not that I think
               | there is that much value in the latter - by design, a
               | penalty kick is the most aesthetically boring of all set
               | pieces. A penalty kick ensues higher emotions due to the
               | odds at play, but from a purely aesthetical point of
               | view, I'd argue that even a corner kick has a much higher
               | potential (a volley, a bicycle kick, a header, a fine-
               | tuned "chess play" that cracks the defense open, etc.)
               | 
               | And a penalty kick doesn't compare to the myriad other
               | open plays in football which have infinitely more
               | aesthetic appeal. A penalty kick is about creating a
               | certain balance of odds, simple as. Every other
               | consideration is secondary.
        
             | canuckintime wrote:
             | The underhand free throw is a counterpoint to your appeal
             | to authority:
             | 
             | https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/08/sports/ncaabasketball/un
             | d...
        
               | daleharvey wrote:
               | That seems like it would be an irrelevant conclusion if
               | we were to be playing hacker news bingo.
        
           | leemailll wrote:
           | Yeah, wait for the shot and always late for a save. They do
           | this for a living, they move before ball rolling for a
           | reason: human not fast enough for a shot from pro.
        
             | canuckintime wrote:
             | Not fast enough for a shot from a pro, a good shot to the
             | top right corner sure. But a penalty shot straight down the
             | middle? A keeper isn't fast enough to catch that?
        
               | ummonk wrote:
               | Most kickers aren't going to do a penalty shot straight
               | down the middle if the keeper is just standing still in
               | the middle.
        
               | canuckintime wrote:
               | which is what I want:
               | 
               | > I hate seeing a keeper dive early to a random side only
               | to be beaten by a weak shot down the middle
        
               | ummonk wrote:
               | So you want a keeper to just stand in the middle and
               | never save anything while everyone shoots to the side?
        
           | sk0g wrote:
           | The average penalty kick crosses the line in about 700
           | milliseconds.
           | 
           | Doesn't sound humanly possible to assess the flight of the
           | ball, prepare your footing, and then finally dive up to 3.5
           | meters to get to the ball.
        
           | arcturus17 wrote:
           | > Most penalties are poorly taken.
           | 
           | According to a study of over 100,000 penalties by InStat,
           | about 75% end up in goal [1]
           | 
           | It's easy to argue therefore that they fulfill their
           | objective within the rules of football: to concede
           | significantly positive scoring odds to an opponent who has
           | otherwise been denied the opportunity to do so.
           | 
           | From what perspective are _most_ penalties poorly taken?
           | Classical mechanics, aesthetics...?
           | 
           | [1] https://instatsport.com/football/article/penalty_research
        
             | canuckintime wrote:
             | Aesthetics wise. It's a 'penalty' shot, it'd be pretty
             | ineffective penalty i.e. punishment if the shot wasn't
             | often successful.
             | 
             | So I'm unhappy with the Aesthetics because keepers know
             | it's largely successful and just guess and jump the gun (or
             | study the stats of the takers and then... just guess) which
             | in turn let's the the takers focus on faking out the keeper
             | with stutter steps and weird run ups. I prefer to see
             | penalties where the kicker focuses on the skill of putting
             | it in a spot nd the keeper responds to that.
             | 
             | They instituted (or started enforcing) the rule that
             | keepers can't jump off the line before the kick is taken.
             | For purely aesthetic reasons, I'd like something similar so
             | they react to the ball instead of guessing
        
               | arcturus17 wrote:
               | The rule revision you're alluding to is merely focused on
               | the statistical outcomes and advantage distributions, and
               | not aesthetics.
               | 
               | > I prefer to see penalties where the kicker focuses on
               | the skill of putting it in a spot nd the keeper responds
               | to that
               | 
               | It's fine that you prefer this, but this isn't what the
               | penalty rule is about. The rule is balanced so that you
               | create a sufficient advantage for the taker. If you pile
               | requirements on the taker, you probably need to
               | compensate with other advantages (ex: take the penalty
               | from 10m instead of 11m). I can see why this is not
               | something that FIFA would want to touch, ever.
        
               | canuckintime wrote:
               | > If you pile requirements on the taker,
               | 
               | The requirement is actually for the keeper not the
               | tacker. But yes, I know I'm tilting at windmills
        
           | yk wrote:
           | If you look at the numbers, a decently hard shot has the ball
           | travel faster than 20 m/s, so the ball is at the goal line
           | 0.5 seconds after the shot. Now, that means the goalie has to
           | travel at something like 7 m/s. For comparison, the long jump
           | world record traveled at 10 m/s, but not from a running
           | start. [0] So allowing for reaction time and some delay
           | because the ball need to travel a bit distance before one can
           | see which direction it travels, it is simply not possible to
           | react to a well shot penalty.
           | 
           | However, that is numbers for professional sports. In amateur,
           | the ball will be shot at a somewhat lower velocity, and
           | importantly, amateurs are a lot less likely to actually shoot
           | a well placed penalty. So in lower leagues, it is a more
           | reasonable strategy to try to react to the ball.
           | 
           | [0] https://www.wired.com/2012/08/long-jump-air-density/
        
           | notahacker wrote:
           | Most weak shots down the middle (by competent penalty takers
           | that aren't a bag of nerves) are a conscious reaction to the
           | keeper moving to the side the player hoped to slot his
           | penalty.
           | 
           | If the keeper doesn't move, the ball is comfortably
           | stroked/smashed past him on that side.
        
       | DevX101 wrote:
       | Expert athletes are able to offload much of the mental processing
       | of their game to the subconscious. We all do this to some degree
       | (most of us aren't solving differential equations in real time to
       | catch a ball), but great athletes are able to do this for many
       | more sport specific tasks than casual players.
       | 
       | Here's a mindblowing video of Ronaldo making a goal in complete
       | darkness after only seeing the first few milliseconds of the ball
       | path: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t03LHpeWnpA&t=330s
        
         | mettamage wrote:
         | Definitely a good example of Kahneman
        
         | elgenie wrote:
         | A reasonable and forum-appropriate analogy might be touch-
         | typing.
         | 
         | In the nanosecond at which the lights go out, Ronaldo's brain
         | has finished (the equivalent of) considering the concept of
         | "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog" and engaged the
         | autopilot for reifying that into keystrokes while at the same
         | point the amateur soccer player is still doing (the equivalent
         | of) a hunt-and-peck for the "T" key.
        
         | abcanthur wrote:
         | I've always wanted to see an experiment to see if free kicks
         | (or teed golf shots, or a teed football) performance went down
         | if the athlete was not allowed to set or tee the ball
         | themselves. Soccer players will always give the ball a gentle
         | toss onto the ground and watch it settle; do world class
         | athletes "see" the millimeter differences in the ball position
         | and subconsciously take into account before striking??
        
         | Spooky23 wrote:
         | The line between experts and non-experts is how they manage.
         | 
         | I'm a little league coach, currently with 9-10 year olds. Once
         | the kids get comfortable with basic mechanics, the real
         | challenge of the game is _not_ thinking about mechanics,
         | _while_ thinking about the tactical picture.
         | 
         | It's difficult - in our case right now, working with a talented
         | pitcher who starts to panic and throws wild when she gets
         | rattled in the game (by a walk, hit, etc).
         | 
         | The joyous part as a coach is that with repetition and support,
         | the kids figure it out! That cycle continues.
        
           | clusterhacks wrote:
           | I loved coaching baseball for that age group. For our local
           | rec league levels that is the first entry to kid-pitch.
           | 
           | It was really off-putting how outcome focused some of our
           | other coaches were. I am a player development nerd (Driveline
           | youth certified now - highly recommended - and love their
           | philosophy shaped to rec players) and hated playing teams
           | with coaches that tried to manipulate our player draft
           | process to vacuum up all the better athletes. Those were the
           | teams that would max out their two pitchers' pitch counts
           | every game and cycle all the non-starters on their team
           | through right field.
           | 
           | I moved onto softball coaching at our local middle school and
           | enjoy player development and coaching at that level too. We
           | lost this year to pandemic closures but I am looking forward
           | to going full-on gamified tech next year (Blast sensors,
           | pocket radar, lots of quick fun drills to keep things
           | moving).
        
           | Cyril_HN wrote:
           | I think a lot of amateur pool players will feel that. They
           | get into a rhythm and start potting everything. Then they
           | either beak the rhythm, get a difficult shot, or notice their
           | success, over think it all and mess up the mechanics.
           | 
           | This analogy doesn't go particular far, but it works to
           | explain the difference between conscious and subconscious
           | mechanical focus.
        
         | bps4484 wrote:
         | I have a theory that how good someone is at something (soccer,
         | the piano, programming) is directly tied to what they can put
         | into their subconscious brain. The more that you can do
         | subconsciously the better you are.
         | 
         | I realized this after thinking about skills like dribbling in
         | basketball where first you get plain dribbling into your
         | subconscious, then more complex dribbling, then entire moves.
         | 
         | Athletes always talk about when "the game started slowing down"
         | and I always wondered if this was pushing a lot of faculties
         | into their subconscious so they could operate at that speed.
        
         | justicezyx wrote:
         | Wow very nice video. I have been drinking too much ML koolade
         | and gradually disenchanted about human capabilities. This is an
         | example that human capabilities are still something one don't
         | need to feel inferior to machine. I.e., I think the current ML
         | tech can predict trajectory equally well. But there is nothing
         | super human.
        
           | teruakohatu wrote:
           | See Moravec's paradox. We can easily build a human-
           | performance image classifiers, but don't have robots that can
           | hear humans at football.
           | 
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moravec's_paradox
        
         | iamben wrote:
         | That's a wonderful video. What a talent. Reminded me of a
         | product I read about a while ago -
         | https://www.bernell.com/product/STROBE/Vision_Therapy_BestSe...
         | - the glasses flicker between clear and not so you learn to
         | interpret the motion of the ball rather than relying on vision
         | alone. Very cool!
        
       | allenu wrote:
       | Not quite the same, but this is like me walking down the stairs
       | and becoming conscious of my walking. I end up overthinking my
       | steps and have to go more slowly otherwise I risk missing a step
       | and falling.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-05-23 23:02 UTC)