Fig 1.
Quantification of Zone is carried out using the position of the IBA-player on a 2 x 2 m grid that begins 34 m from the goal line.
Fig 2.
Geometry to determine Pressure.
The Pressure Zone covers four sub-areas with different radii, which result from the angle (α) between IBA-player and the center of the goal. Pressure depends on the sub-area and the distance (dD).
Fig 3.
Geometry to determine Shot Density.
A defender increases Shot Density if he is in the Blocking Zone formed between the position of the IBA-player and the goal. The figure is calculated from the distance between the IBA-player (P) and the goal (dgoal) and between the IBA-player and the defender (dD).
Fig 4.
Geometry to determine Pass Density.
Pass Density depends on the difference between the number of defenders and attackers (Majority) within the Interception Zone (IZ).
Fig 5.
Match scenarios (n = 100) were grouped into Danger Groups (DG) by experts using a scale of 1 (little danger) to 5 (very dangerous). Scenarios that were classified as dangerous by the observers were also classified as dangerous on average by the algorithm. All of the post hoc tests between neighboring groups also showed significant differences (α = .01).
Table 1.
Correlations between performance indicators and between performance indicators and skill indicator (win probability (WP) based on betting odds).
The greatest correlation between WP and the performance indicators exists with Match Dominance (MD).
Fig 6.
Course of Danger in a match scenario.
Spatial configuration and value of model components are shown in four key moments.
Fig 7.
Performance indicators of 4 matches in 2014/15 Bundesliga season.
Goals (G), Shots at Goal (SG), Passing Accuracy (PA), Tackling Rate (TR) and Ball Possession (BP) provide inadequate information to assess the course of a match correctly. Match Performance (MP) allow a significantly better assessment of whether a team has been “lucky” and won through an individual action or has been able to set up many dangerous situations and has “earned” the win.
Fig 8.
Performance variables in the course of the match Hannover (H96) vs. Dortmund (BVB).
Danger for an interval (DAi) is visualized by bars, Current Performance (CP) by dashed lines and Current Dominance (CD) by a solid line. DAi and CP were inverted for the away team. CD is shown from the perspective of the home team.
Fig 9.
Ranking of teams based on 64 matches.
The vertical position of a team indicates its average Match Dominance (MD), the horizontal position describes the number of points (P) it has gained. The quadrants classify team according to the factors successful vs. less successful and consistent vs. lucky. A position above the main diagonal indicates an unfavorable ratio of Dominance to success (Points), a position below it a positive ratio.