Down by 14 late, shouldn't you go for 2-point conversions?

[Worm Guts]

You should do whatever gives you the best chance to win, whether it's in regulation or overtime. If you use the odds listed, then you should be going for two.
The only issue I can think of is that the success rate of a 2 pt conversion might vary from team to team. So some teams would be better off going for 2, while others should be kicking.

[Dry_Fish]

http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats ... tics/2014/

if you were curious about the conversion rate for team over the years

I wonder if the stats are influences by the situation if the game....if the 2 point attempt are more successful when a defense just got beat for a potentially tied up/win (depending of the xp). This versus a defense that's trying to prevent a 1 score

[Yoshun]

The problem is the sample sizes are too small with two point conversions. Id take the garunteed points and take it to OT.

[tha_rock220]

http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2013/01/two_point_conversion_strategy_the_late_game_scenario_in_which_going_for.2.html

I thought this was an interesting article. Basically, if you're down by 14 and get a TD, you should go for 2 to make it a 6-point game and have a chance to win in regulation. If you don't get it, you're down by 8 and still have a chance to tie it up.

Assuming that a 2-point conversion is successful 45% of the time, extra points are 100%, and OT is 50/50, the math works out thus (assuming you get both TD's):

45% chance of winning the game in regulation
24.75% chance of going to OT
30.25% chance of losing in regulation

= 57.375% chance of winning (45% + 24.75%/2)

... vs. kicking extra points and having a 50% chance in OT.

I kind of wish NFL coaches would think more like this instead of being conservative all the time.

Your math is incorrect. Assuming a 45% two point conversion rate and a 100% PAT success rate, you're looking at an average of 1.8 points instead of 2 points. If you go for two on both touchdowns you have a 49.5% chance getting the game into overtime, a 30.25 % chance of losing in regulation, and a 20.25% chance of winning in regulation.

Using the proper numbers, the probability of winning is .45 and the probability of losing is .55. So given your assumption that the trailing team scores both touchdowns and gives up none, you've traded a 50/50 shot for a 45/55 shot. That's a poor choice.

[Keller61]

http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2013/01/two_point_conversion_strategy_the_late_game_scenario_in_which_going_for.2.html

I thought this was an interesting article. Basically, if you're down by 14 and get a TD, you should go for 2 to make it a 6-point game and have a chance to win in regulation. If you don't get it, you're down by 8 and still have a chance to tie it up.

Assuming that a 2-point conversion is successful 45% of the time, extra points are 100%, and OT is 50/50, the math works out thus (assuming you get both TD's):

45% chance of winning the game in regulation
24.75% chance of going to OT
30.25% chance of losing in regulation

= 57.375% chance of winning (45% + 24.75%/2)

... vs. kicking extra points and having a 50% chance in OT.

I kind of wish NFL coaches would think more like this instead of being conservative all the time.

Your math is incorrect. Assuming a 45% two point conversion rate and a 100% PAT success rate, you're looking at an average of 1.8 points instead of 2 points. If you go for two on both touchdowns you have a 49.5% chance getting the game into overtime, a 30.25 % chance of losing in regulation, and a 20.25% chance of winning in regulation.

Using the proper numbers, the probability of winning is .45 and the probability of losing is .55. So given your assumption that the trailing team scores both touchdowns and gives up none, you've traded a 50/50 shot for a 45/55 shot. That's a poor choice.

No, I'm quite sure my math is correct. What you're missing is that you don't need to make both 2-point conversions to win in regulation. You only need to make the first one.

[Dry_Fish]

missed first 2-pt conversion and need second one to tie = (55% of not making it X 45% making it) = 24.75
miss both 2-pt conversion and lose = .55 X .55 = .3025
make first 2 pt and then kick extra point = .45 X 1.00 = .45

[tha_rock220]

http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2013/01/two_point_conversion_strategy_the_late_game_scenario_in_which_going_for.2.html

I thought this was an interesting article. Basically, if you're down by 14 and get a TD, you should go for 2 to make it a 6-point game and have a chance to win in regulation. If you don't get it, you're down by 8 and still have a chance to tie it up.

Assuming that a 2-point conversion is successful 45% of the time, extra points are 100%, and OT is 50/50, the math works out thus (assuming you get both TD's):

45% chance of winning the game in regulation
24.75% chance of going to OT
30.25% chance of losing in regulation

= 57.375% chance of winning (45% + 24.75%/2)

... vs. kicking extra points and having a 50% chance in OT.

I kind of wish NFL coaches would think more like this instead of being conservative all the time.

Your math is incorrect. Assuming a 45% two point conversion rate and a 100% PAT success rate, you're looking at an average of 1.8 points instead of 2 points. If you go for two on both touchdowns you have a 49.5% chance getting the game into overtime, a 30.25 % chance of losing in regulation, and a 20.25% chance of winning in regulation.

Using the proper numbers, the probability of winning is .45 and the probability of losing is .55. So given your assumption that the trailing team scores both touchdowns and gives up none, you've traded a 50/50 shot for a 45/55 shot. That's a poor choice.

No, I'm quite sure my math is correct. What you're missing is that you don't need to make both 2-point conversions to win in regulation. You only need to make the first one.

It's binomially distributed. I'm not sure where your numbers came from.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Keller61]

Your math is incorrect. Assuming a 45% two point conversion rate and a 100% PAT success rate, you're looking at an average of 1.8 points instead of 2 points. If you go for two on both touchdowns you have a 49.5% chance getting the game into overtime, a 30.25 % chance of losing in regulation, and a 20.25% chance of winning in regulation.

Using the proper numbers, the probability of winning is .45 and the probability of losing is .55. So given your assumption that the trailing team scores both touchdowns and gives up none, you've traded a 50/50 shot for a 45/55 shot. That's a poor choice.

No, I'm quite sure my math is correct. What you're missing is that you don't need to make both 2-point conversions to win in regulation. You only need to make the first one.

It's binomially distributed. I'm not sure where your numbers came from.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

See Dry_Fish's post above.

It's not a standard distribution, because the two events are not independent. You only go for 2 on the second try if you didn't get it the first time.

[tha_rock220]

See Dry_Fish's post above.

It's not a standard distribution, because the two events are not independent. You only go for 2 on the second try if you didn't get it the first time.

Nice.

So going for two on the first touchdown makes the most sense. You're increasing your chances of losing in regulation, but you're also increasing your chance of winning the game. I read this about hacking Dwight Howard last year. Increasing the variance increases the chances you'll cut into the lead or fall further behind at the expense of staying the same number of points behind(which is basically as bad as falling further behind).

[Roger Murdock]

You only go for 2 points 2x times if you miss the first. If you make the first, you are suddenly down 6 instead of 7. Now a touchdown wins it and 2 fgs tie. I think that's what more coaches should do because it gives you more flexibility and more conditions to win or tie. If you don't convert the first one you still need the 2nd touchdown and now need to convert the 2 to tie.