You are reading a single comment by @danwentskiing and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
London Fixed Gear and Single-Speed is a community of predominantly fixed gear and single-speed cyclists in and around London, UK.
This site is supported almost exclusively by donations. Please consider donating a small amount regularly.
@danwentskiing
Amazing camera work, but unremittingly defensive play from both teams. On video (IMO) it's a very boring game to watch, with lots of messy, crammed goal mouth hacking and blocking, very few open plays and only one nice goal (Hooks' weird off-side crash/goal). I think if we're going to make polo more appealing, we need to encourage the opposite, but that discussion is going on elsewhere...
I watched a couple of minutes, then started again with a pen and paper and made the following observations:
Total shots - Hooks 19, CMD 25.
Shots on 2+ goalies - Hooks 15, CMD 10.
...which led to losing possession - Hooks 11, CMD 5
...which led to a goal - Hooks 1, CMD 2*
Less than 2 goalie shots - Hooks 4, CMD 15
....which led to losing possession - Hooks 4, CMD 9
....which led to a goal - Hooks 0, CMD 2*
I wanted the stats to show that double-goalieing is too advantageous, but CMD showed they can score on any double/triple goalie setups, where Hooks couldn't. If I can be bothered (unlikely) it would be interesting to see the results from an 'open' team (SB?) versus a defensive team...
*(The eagle-eyed will note I only have four goals for CMD, which pretty much fucks up the validity of anything, but I wasted 25 minutes of my morning on that, so fuck it). It's hard to call some of the shots, some aren't on camera, and it's debatable when there's 2 or more goalies some times. If someone else can be bothered to do the same exercise, we can average out the tallies... Most likely nobody cares.