It looks pretty comprehensively done, and it may well be the authoritative analysis for many years to come.
Having said that, I didn't study it closely all the way through. The conclusion is about what I anticipated:
... even when properly accounting for the reduced value of a “timed” possession, there still exists opportunities for implementing strategic timing. Interestingly, these optimal timing strategies revealed benefits outside of the traditional “2-for-1” time period, which suggests that there is a legitimate “3-for-2” strategy opportunity.
A strategy like this will only be effective in real-time situations if it is simplified so that players can execute the strategy with little instruction or deep thought...
Kinda hard to cut and paste from the article, but here is the 'cheat sheet' accompanying:
Code: Select all
Poss. start Simple Optimal Pt. Advantage
time (sec) Strategy End Time Over "Normal"
30 to 40 Push pace 25 to 29 0.29
47 to 52 Slow pace 25 to 29 0.11
58 to 66 Push pace 51 to 56 0.06
Relative to gaining 2 points in a 2-for-1 strategy (top line), your odds are 1/0.29/2, or about 1 in 7.
The middle line seems to be a strategy to
deny your opponent a 2:1. Consistent with the previous calculation, that works once in 18 tries.
The true 3:2 strategy (bottom line) pays off one time in 33.
These odds, I think, account for the occasions when the strategies 'backfire'.
Watching the game clock AND the shot clock, while trying to get a good shot at 25-29 sec, you might have to have code words for what's going on. Obviously, getting the ball with 52 sec. left, it may be super-optimal to shoot at 29 sec. (1 on the shot clock); but in a game, you will take a good shot before that.