EclectEcon

Economic Impact Statements in Sports

I am currently teaching a course on the Economics of Sports: An International Perspective at the Bader International Study Centre [BISC], Herstmonceux Castle, UK. This is the first time I have taught the course to students who have little or no background in economics, and it has opened my eyes a bit more to some of the major problems we will continue to face if we do not improve economic literacy. Here is what happened:

The BISC has a policy that every course must involve field trips. For our first field trip, we went to the Eastbourne Boroughs Football Club in Eastbourne to watch the World Cup match between England and Algeria. It was a great place for students (none from the UK) to watch the World Cup amidst excited fans, and yet be considerably safer than they might have been in some of the rowdier places I visited four years ago during the World Cup. 

What does this have to do with economics of sports? The economics came in the assignment given to the students. 

1. Estimate the amount of money people spent at the club during that World Cup game.
2. What do you think those people would have done with that money if they hadn't spent it at the club?
3. Based on your answers to the first two questions, what do you think was the economic impact of the World Cup on the local economy?

Two of the fourteen students suggested that the impact was probably, on balance, pretty small. The rest saw these expenditures as injections into the local spending stream that would boost demand throughout the local economy, despite having noted in their answers to the second question that the money would likely have been spent on something else within the community if it hadn't been spent at the football club.

When I read those answers, I sent the students e-mails telling them to read Chapter 13 of Why England Lose (a chapter we had not yet covered in class) and redo the assignment. In that chapter, Kuper and Szymanski point out that the economic impact is primarily to divert spending from one form of entertainment to another so that while there is a diversion effect, the net impact on an economy is minor (and might even be negative if enhanced congestion and security problems arise). 

Given my cynicism, I expect about 2/3 of the students understood the point I was trying to get across and might recognize it in a non-classroom setting; the rest just tried to give me an answer I wanted.

But if it took this process for smart students to have an "aha!" moment, i.e. to figure out and learn that economic impact statements for sporting events and stadia are often suspect and biased, imagine the difficulty of teaching this concept in general.

Our work is never-ending.

Vuvuzela Philharmonic? Who Knew?

Knowing our interest in the topic, Dave sent this article around to a number of us, along with this commet:

Are you as appalled as I am by the intrusion of unwarranted "sports events" on a great music festival? Let us hope for better on July 11.

Here is the introduction to the article:

JOHANNESBURG—Members of the South Africa Vuvuzela Philharmonic Orchestra, widely considered to be among the best large-scale monotonic wind instrument ensembles in the world, told reporters Friday they were furious over the recent outbreaks of international soccer matches during their traditional outdoor concerts.

"I cannot imagine what is getting into these football teams that they would suddenly begin full-scale international competition just when we are beginning our 2010 concert series," said Dr. Stefan Coetzee, the Philharmonic's program and concert director. "It is disrespectful to the performers, it is disrespectful to the music itself, and by extension, it is disrespectful to the great nation of South Africa."

It is pretty easy to guess the source of the article.

Why England Lose

For my course on the Economics of Sports at the Bader Int'l Study Centre (Herstmonceux Castle), my students are reading Why England Lose by Kuper and Szymanski. As part of the programme here, every course has at least one field trip. For this course, our first field trip last night was to the Eastbourne Football Club to watch England play Algeria in a World Cup football/soccer match. It was a great, boisterous atmosphere, but still sufficiently safe that I felt okay taking the students there. Four years ago when I was here, I went to some pretty rowdy pubs to watch World Cup matches, places I would rather not go with students.

One of the assertions of the K&S book is the "geographic rule": teams from western Europe dominate, especially in the early rounds of international play. While that conclusion has been borne out on average so far, the recent defeats of France by Mexico and of Germany by Serbia do not support the conclusion. The students have taken great delight in pointing out these exceptions.

 Further some (albeit weak) empirical results from the book conclude that teams with more international experience and from larger countries with higher GDP per capita will tend to score more goals. And of course the students pointed out that Slovenia's tie with (and near defeat of) the US, and Algeria's tie with England last night are not consistent with those empirical results. 

England play again on Wednesday at 3pm our time against Slovenia, the only team in Group C to have won a match. What a co-incidence.... that just happens to be when our sports economics course meets on Wednesday. But because the castle admins won't open the castle pub to show the match, we may have to re-schedule the class for that evening and may a trek up to the local village for yet another field trip....

.

Interesting.... this book is not available in the US.

Addenda: Two points I forgot to include in the original posting:

• Kuper and Szymanski had cautious optimism about the team's performance under coach Capello. However, they also pointed out that the team still struggle against strong opposition.
• My answer to Why England Lose: they just aren't good enough. It's not a lack of heart or drive or spirit. And it is not necessarily the money they make in the EPL; after all other countries have many players who earn big bucks in major football leagues. If money were the explanation, we should be able to find a negative correlation between the goal differentials and teams' players' professional salaries. I do not have the data to examine this possibility, but it might yield interesting results.
  
  On the field during the World Cup, England just don't look any better than the teams with whom they have drawn so far.

More on Vuvuzelas: some economics and other notes

Thanks to Kais, I learned there are iPhone apps that play the annoying sound of the vuvuzelas [plastic horns] at the World Cup. Of course there are! I have now downloaded one of the free versions and am prepared for rowdy pubs. Or maybe I'll just play my air horn app that was designed more for NHL games, I think. Or maybe the cowbells, designed for curling events. Or maybe I'll alternate until the battery runs out or I'm thrown out, whichever comes first... (I have an external battery source for my iPhone, so it'll last pretty long!)

Is it just my imagination, or are all the vuvuzelas tuned to the same note? It would make sense that they are, since they appear to have been mass-manufactured. But are the economies of scale in vuvuzela manufacturing so serious that the firm producing them has a natural monopoly? If not, and if there are other producers, is there some reason they are all produced to play the same note?

 If I had one, I would cut it off at the plastic mouthpiece just a bit and insert my french horn mouthpiece (which I just happen to have with me on my travels), all so I could have a slightly higher pitched noise-maker. 

 Some years ago, I made some vuvuzela-wannabes to take to a local baseball game. I just cut some gray plastic electrical conduit to various lengths (to get different notes; drilling holes didn't work for that) and they were good and loud. Not as loud as the real thing, but still loud in a small stadium. And they have the advantage that they are easily smuggled in, tucked down one's pantlegs (we were told that vuvuzelas are banned from some ballparks because they are so loud and so annoying, but not at the ballpark we attended).

I'm not sure, but I think this might be my first posting ever that combines three of my interests: economics, sports, and music. If I thought long and hard, I could probably incorporate acting, too, but that might detract from the topic of the posting a bit.

For my previous posting on this topic, see this.

Btw, no pun intended in the title for this posting.

Vuvuzelas at the World Cup

I have never minded those plastic horns at sporting events....until now. Every time I have heard them in the past, fans have used them to cheer for or about something rather than as substitutes for the drone pipe on a set of bagpipes. Making noise, all sorts of noise, when cheering seems appropriate at sporting events. For background, see this as just one example, which concludes:

... of course the last laugh belonged to the U.S. fans, who saw their team capitalize on a blunder by England goalie Robert Green, who now joins Bill Buckner and Steve Bartman at the Home for Unfairly Demonized Sports Villains.

Mr. Green probably wouldn't mind if someone blew a vuvuzela in his ear. Even the Infamous Plastic Horn of Distraction is less shrill than the panic coming from his homeland.

The constant drone of the vuvuzelas seems pointless other than to say, "See? We can keep up this pointless, annoying sound steadily for nearly two hours!"

I confess it might be fun to be a part of the annoyance if I were in the stadium. But watching a World Cup match on television is far less pleasant with all that noise in the background. And friends tell me that listening to a match on the radio is really unpleasant with all the vuvuzela noise going on.

My solution, however, is not to ban the plastic horns from the stadia. I see two possible alternative options:

• Glass in the announcers' booths so we hear less of the drone over tv and radio. 
• I'm not sure this would work, but it might: use similar technology to that of noise-canceling headphones to offset the sound of the vuvuzelas.

The Baseball Commissioner Must Change the Umpire's Callafter all, they did it in the pine-tar incident

I know that in the grand scheme of things, this really doesn't matter much. But it wouldn't take much to set things right.

Detroit Tiger pitcher, Armando Galarraga had retired 26 opponents in a row in tonight's game against Cleveland. If he retired the 27th, he would pitch a perfect game, only the 21st in the history of baseball (albeit the third one this year!). 

Ground ball to the first baseman, who tossed it to Galarraga covering first base. As the replays showed, the throw beat the runner by half a step. But incomprehensibly enough, the first base umpire, Jim Joyce, called the batter safe. See here for details. After the game and after studying the replays, umpire Joyce admitted he had "blown the call":

"I just cost that kid a perfect game," Joyce said. "I thought he beat the throw. I was convinced he beat the throw, until I saw the replay."

"It was the biggest call of my career," said Joyce, who became a full-time major league umpire in 1989.

Now it is time for the Commissioner's Office to make it right. If they could over-rule the umpire in the famous George Brett pine-tar incident, surely they can over-rule this blown call and award Galarraga a perfect game.

And since Galarraga got the next batter out on a ground ball to the shortstop, it would essentially cost nothing to make the change.

EastLink Cable Update

I just received a telephone call from Ashley at EastLink. She says they have worked out an arrangement whereby we will now be able to watch Toronto Blue Jays games on the MLB extra-innings package (channel 456 in our area) for the duration of the Memorial Cup hockey play-offs. I hope so; we'll find out tonight. 

I gather this plan required some fairly quick negotiations on their part. Surely in the long-run  it would have been (or would be) preferable for them just to carry the Alternate Sportsnet channel. Also, channel 456 is not in high definition (I don't know whether the Alternative Sportsnet channel is available in hi-def).

She was also quite apologetic about the inability to provide feedback to them via their website and said she had sent a note to their IT folks asking them to work on it.

Earlier today, I received e-mail from Sportsnet confirming that indeed they do NOT charge service providers to carry the Alternative Sportsnet channel.

Finally (full disclosure), to compensate me for my angst and hassles, EastLink is providing us with a month of no-charge for the sports package.

Dear EastLink Cable Company

You folks are total jerks. Here is what happened:

• In its infinite wisdom, Rogers Sportsnet decided to carry the Memorial Cup (Junior A) hockey games instead of Toronto Blue Jays baseball on ALL of its channels. They announced on the air and on their website that we could watch the baseball games on their "alternate network", which I gather is not unlike TSN2 or CBC-Bold --- a second set of programming from the network.
• We were unable to find the Alternate Sportsnet channel among the hundreds of channels carried by EastLink Cable (which recently acquired Bluewater Cable, our original cable service provider.
• So during the weekend, I called Eastlink to find out where I could watch the ballgames that were being played.
• During my first call, I spoke with Andy, based in Prince Edward Island (note: I live in Ontario). He remarked that one of his co-workers was dealing with a call about exactly the same issue. They had no idea why we did not have access to the Alternate Sportsnet channel. 
• I complained that since I, in effect, sign over my entire monthly paycheque (or so it seems --- I pay quite a lot for a home customer) to you folks, I thought it reasonable that I be able to watch the game somewhere, somehow on my cable system. I even pay extra for the MLB package, and said, "Well surely I should be able to find a telecast of the Jays game somewhere in that package. 
• Andy agreed and said he was certain I could view the Jays game on at least one of the MLB  package channels. To that end, he consulted with someone else and then gave me two different channel numbers to try that afternoon (I was calling in the morning).
• Well, sure as shootin', when game time rolled around, we tried every channel we could in the entire lineup from EastLink, and we could not find the game. 
• So I called your customer service number again. 
• This time I was connected with Tim in Halifax, Nova Scotia. He clearly had no idea what was going on, but he checked with someone at EastLink who said that EastLink was unable to obtain the license for the Alternative Sportsnet channel. 
• I said, "I don't believe EastLink is unable to obtain the license. Alternate Sportsnet is carried on Shaw Cable; it is also carried by Bell Satellite and by something called Cable-Cable. I don't believe EastLink couldn't get the license if you wanted it." He stuck by his story, and I stuck by my criticism, feeling considerably cheesed off.
• To make matters worse, it seems that because the BlueJays are carried on the Alternate Sportsnet channel, they are blacked out on the MLB package. So we were stuck: no Blue Jays games while the Memorial Cup is being played.
• Because I was curious, I sent e-mail to Sportsnet to ask why EastLink was unable to obtain a license for the Alternate Sportsnet channel:

Is there some reason I cannot watch the Toronto Blue Jays on East Link? I gather they do not provide the Alternate Sportsnet channel, but can you tell me why? They say it is because they are unable to obtain the license, but I don't understand that explanation.

What is worse, we cannot even see the Blue Jays on MLB extra innings. Why are we being left out?

• Today I received the following response from Sportsnet:

Thanks for your recent email. We provided the feed for the Sportsnet Alternative channel to all providers including Eastlink. No license was necessary, they just had to get the broadcast feed from us. We are not sure why they were not able to do so.

Sincerely
Jim LaChapelle
Audience Relations


• It isn't completely clear that Sportsnet provides the feed for Sportsnet Alternative at no charge to all providers. Their response certainly reads that way, though. And even if they were charging for the feed and you folks didn't want to pay for it, you should have told me that instead of saying you were unable to obtain the license.
• I then tried to write to you in e-mail to inquire further about the situation. I logged onto your site.
• But before I could click on "Contact Us", a box popped up that requires a user to click on the name of their former cable provider, in my case, Bluewater Cable.
• And no matter what browser I use, I am told that the link doesn't work. I cannot even write to you directly to express my concerns. Hence, I am left with posting this on a blog for others to read.

So, 

• not only did someone tell me I could watch the game on certain channels when I couldn't, 
• not only did someone tell me that you were unable to obtain the license when apparently you can,
• but then your "contact us" link is inoperable.

Is it time for the CRTC to look into your behaviour? Or is it just time for people in our area to reconsider their satellite vs cable decision?

There is a simple, two-part solution to this situation:

1. Stop lying to (or at the very least misleading) your customers.
2. Start providing the Alternative Sportsnet channel for your customers.

Regards,

John Palmer

Caption Contest

Over at the curling blog where I co-blog with Alan Adamson, I have posted a photo of the German skip, Andrea Schopp, at the 2010 Women's World Championships. If you have a suggested caption for it, please go there to post it in the comments (and please, keep it sort of clean):

Comments are closed here; please go there to offer your suggestions.

Earth Hour? Not me (and not the major media around here who are pushing it so hard, either)

Earth Hour just seems like so much "feel-good" clap-trap to me. Not that there's all that much wrong with feel-good clap-trap, but it becomes unconscionable when others try to shove it down my throat.

So I'm supposed to turn off my lights and tv and computer during the semi-finals of the 2010 Women's World Curling Championships tonight? Ain't gonna happen.

And I really doubt that any of the local radio or TV stations who have been telling everyone to participate will go off the air.

Curling

Two of the best teams in the world right now are facing each other in the last game of the round robin tonight at the 2010 Women's World Championship: Team Canada vs. Scotland.

I Couldn't Watch without Getting Tears in My EyesEven Reading This Moved Me

Joannie Rochette skated to a bronze medal in figure skating at the 2010 Olympics just days after her mother died suddenly and uexpectedly. Believe me, the tears were flowing in this household. This description is one of the best analyses of the figure skating event I have seen (most of the time I'm not all that keen on figure skating).

...But none of that mattered because I was too busy rooting for Joannie Rochette to make it to the podium.

The Olympics are full of manufactured feeling, but this was a dose of the real thing. Rochette's performance was moving, nuanced, and intimate. You could feel Rochette's desire to be there, with the crowd, even in the midst of her loss (the evidence of which was written all over her face every now and then). Having lost my own mother a year ago, I could imagine some of what she was experiencing, and, like everyone else watching, was struck by her grace and composure and clarity. TV commentators often go for cheap sentiment, but in this case, the words courageous and inspiring really did apply. (Too bad many of us can no longer hear them without a dollop of cynicism attached.)

Rochette's performance had a timeless patience to it and was suffused with a sense of longing. She has said her mother was very important to her skating; she even told reporters that she'd had to ask her mother to come watch her practice once a week, as a way of motivating herself. (Rochette noted, too, that it can be embarrassing for a young adult to say she needs her mom—her frankness won me over utterly.) If some of her footwork seemed less artful than Yu-Na's, the height of her jumps less stunning, so be it. She had our attention, and not merely because her mother died, but because her mother died and yet she went on to skate with a real quality of being present. You could see what this meant to her, and in that sense her mother lingered over the performance like the track of the skate on the ice. The performance was an act of ritual attentiveness, and we were lucky to witness it. At the end of her lovely, focused program—in which she offered up a number of solid jumps—she craned her neck upward and blew a kiss—to her father and, perhaps, also to her mother. Her eyes moved around the stadium almost as if she were looking for her. I couldn't help feeling that I wanted to say, as one motherless daughter to another, what millions surely thought: Surely her mother would have been proud. It's not sappy to say so.

Tears, again, as I re-read that. Very moving.

Whew! May We Have Our Money Back Now, Please?

I know lots of people in Canada get lots of thrills when Canadian athletes win medals at The Olympics. I don't, at least not much. And I certainly received negative utils from the "Own the Podium" campaign sponsored by the Canadian Olympic Committee. I sure hope they didn't get a whole tonne of taxpayer money to support their campaign "blueprint". As Michael said on his Facebook page,

With all due respect to the Canadian Olympic Committee, was this really ever in doubt?

And now they have admitted failure [h/t MT].

The head of the Canadian Olympic Committee told a media briefing Monday that Canada won't finish first in the medal count at the Vancouver Games.

Chris Rudge acknowledged it's unrealistic to catch the Americans.

Heading into Monday's competition, Canada is tied for fourth in the medal standings with nine. The Americans lead with 24.

Canada has spent $117 million in the last five years on Own The Podium, a blueprint to finish atop the medal standings at the Games.

It reminds me of the unhappy student a number of years ago who had written out a plan for being successful in university but just didn't have the ability to carry it out.

Support for Olympic Curling (and other?) Athletes

As I have watched the curling from the 2010 Olympics, I have heard several of the commentators tell us that so-and-so from such-and-such country is a full-time curler. S/he is sponsored by their gubmnt and unlike Canadian curlers does not have to have another job to support themselves. There is always a whinging, wistful tone to such pronouncements, suggesting that in Canada we should also provide gubmnt financing for our top curlers.

I find this tone and its implications offensive for two important reasons:

• It ignores the considerable sponsorship and prize money for curling that is provided by the private sector in Canada. Top curlers earn an acceptable (though probably not luxurious) living when their winnings and sponsorships are added up. This private support for curling in Canada is monumentally greater than the private support for curlers in other countries.
• If the gubmnt were to provide support for Canadian curlers, who should receive that support? Only the top teams? If so, how might the gubmnt bureaucrats determine which are the best teams? And keep in mind that the fourth best team in Alberta could well be considerably better (and more likely to win on the international level) than the best teams from some of the other provinces. Gubmnts are notoriously bad at "picking winners" in other industries, and I see no reason for them to be any more successful at picking winners in sports.

In fact, one might well argue that one of the several reasons for Canadian success in curling (aside from years of practice and inculcation) is that curlers in Canada must compete for sponsorship and prize money. Those who aren't very good don't receive much money; those who are better tend to receive more money. There is a huge incentive to improve one's game.

I doubt if these arguments would apply to all Olympic sports, but they certainly are important when discussing sponsorship for curlers (and probably most other sports for which private sponsorship and prize money are sizable).

Green-Foolery at the Olympics

Speed-skating at the 2010 Olympics was delayed several times as the ice managers tried to deal with the new, electric ice surface refinishing machines. It turned out that these new “green” machines left grooves and puddles in the ice. Finally, authorities had the good sense to import a propane-powered standard zamboni to use for the remainder of the speed-skating events. For more, see this (h/t Eva).

And keep in mind that depending on how the electricity is generated and stored, it isn’t all that clear that electric-powered zambonis are any greener than the traditional ones.

The Contribution of the Olympics to the Budget Crisis in Greece

As the 2010 Winter Olympics begin, it is appropriate to recognize what a drain the Olympics can be on a small economy. Vic Matheson summarized it well at The Sports Economist:

...[T]he Olympics broke the bank. Government deficits rose every year after 1999, peaking at 7.5% of GDP in 2004, the year of the Olympics, thanks in large part to the 9 billion euro price tag for the Games. For a relatively small country like Greece, the cost of hosting the Games equaled roughly 5% of the annual GDP of the country.

Of course, the Olympics didn't usher in an economic boom. Indeed, in 2005 Greece suffered an Olympic-sized hangover with GDP growth falling to its lowest level in a decade.

While its hard to place all of the blame for the current Greek meltdown on the Olympics, the lingering debts from the Games are undoubtedly exacerbating an already difficult situation.

Sunderland-Stoke, 0-0: At least in curling they changed the rules to get some scoring

After waiting all weekend to watch the Sunderland-Stoke football game, I was bored to tears by the lack of scoring. If I had been in the crowd, I might have booed, too. I saw some fine athleticism, as well as some shoddy play, but nil-nil scores are about as boring as pitching duels in baseball or defensive struggles in American football.

When the lack of scoring outraged fans of curling two decades ago, the authorities realized they had to do something to boost the interest in the sport (and the audiences on television), so they implemented the free-guard zone, an innovation of Russ Howard's rink in their practices. Now people rarely, if ever, shout "booorrrr-iiinnngggg" during curling matches. But if soccer/football is going to attract more fans and keep them, it too should do something to increase the scoring in their games.

The Scott Tournament of Hearts is Coming.Is the nude-women-of-curling calendar soft-porn or art?

The Scott Tournament of Hearts, Canada's curling championship for women will soon take place. I know this because in the run-up to the tournament, it appears that suddenly someone somewhere has written yet another article about the Nude Women of Curling Calendar, and hundreds of people are visiting this posting on EclectEcon and this posting on Curling, (where I co-blog with Alan Adamson) to look for the soft-core porn of curling. I'll grant that the few photos I have seen from the past calendars are superb art, but it never ceases to amaze (and disappoint) me that people are more interested in nudity than they are in our writings on other subjects.

BraveRocks? Brave Lochs? Curling and Congestion in Scotland

Last week it looked as if the Royal Caledonia Curling Club (RCCC) would be able to host a Grand Match of curling on Lake of Monteith near Aberfoyle, Scotland. The Grand Match is a gigantic curling competition in which as many as 2000 curlers compete, and the weather has co-operated so little that it has been held only 38 times since 1837; it was last held in 1979.

This year the temperatures had been below freezing for several weeks leading up to the planned event and the ice was forming nicely on Lake of Monteith, which has nice ice for curling when the weather conditions hold up. The last time the Grand Match was held, there were over 6000 people attending, and it was anticipated there would be as many as 10,000 in attendance this time.

And that caused a problem.

A week before the planned event, the RCCC called it off, citing safety issues. The safety concerns were not due to ice conditions. Rather, the RCCC was concerned about access and congestion. From The New Scotsman [h/t Brian Ferguson]:

Colin Grahamslaw, chief executive of the national governing body, defended the decision of the Grand Match Committee.

He said: "Since Monday, we have been working with the police and the emergency services and the local authorities to try and achieve this and make it work, but, in the timescale, it has just not proved possible.

"You are talking about trying to move 2,000 curlers and an unknown number of spectators on and off the site safely. There is only one road in and one road out, and the police and emergency services were really concerned that you could get one snarl-up and there would be gridlock."

Mr Grahamslaw stressed: "We weren't worried by the ice, because the ice would have been thick enough by next week, if it isn't thick enough already."

Mr Grahamslaw said it would have been "irresponsible" to ignore the advice of the emergency services and that the decision to call off the match was deeply disappointing.

I'm not persuaded by these arguments. When I look at the map, I see access from several different directions. I'll admit that access to the site is likely limited, but probably no more so than for other large events in rural areas.

But more importantly, this would have been a perfect time to institute temporary congestion charges. If the RCCC doesn't have the authority to charge for the use of the roads, then it could charge high admission fees for contestants and spectators.

But if it is too costly to monitor and exclude people from the event itself, then with some planning and co-operation, temporary congestion fees could easily be implemented by the local authorities, possibly in the form of temporary toll charges for non-residents. After all, according them, "There is only one road in and one road out..."

What I am saying is that fears of congestion are not necessarily a good reason for having called off the event. Good old Pigouvian taxes could easily have been implemented to reduce congestion. And with the examples of the congestion charges in the city of London, people would likely have a reasonable understanding of why and how they work.

Even though the RCCC declined to sanction the event, and against the advice of local authorities, many curlers still planned to show up for an unofficial version of the Grand Match:

Some told The Scotsman that many enthusiasts were already making plans to stage an unofficial match on the Lake of Menteith within the next few days in protest.

One Glasgow-based curler said: "There are an awful lot of angry curlers who want that match to go ahead with or without the RCCC. I am certain that some sort of Grand Match will go ahead.

But in the end, temperatures rose, the ice had lots of water on it, and very few people showed up.

Ian Fleming, owner of the Lake of Menteith Hotel, said he has been monitoring the situation over the last 24 hours.

"The ice is solid enough just now but the water on it just makes it treacherous to walk on. It's the first time I've ever seen a curling stone causing bow waves.

"There are a number of hardcore curlers out there now, around 28 to 32 players but it's hard to see the rinks under all the water.

Cross-posted at The Sports Economist and at Curling

Information, Reputation, and the Impact of College Athletics: My story about TCU

Way back in the days before people ranked economics departments according publications or citations to publications by their faculty members, departments' reputations seemed to be based more on who knew whom, on who had written important papers, and (perhaps sadly) whether you had even vaguely heard of the school or any of the people who taught there.

When I was finishing my PhD at Iowa State University and beginning to look for a university job, like all good job seekers I went to economics conventions, did my best to meet people and find out who was hiring economists in my field, scoured job listings, and did my best to arrange as many job interviews as I could. But in my naivete and ignorance, I had little to go on. And my lack of information and my ignorance let me down several times.

One instance that I remember involved Texas Christian University [TCU]. Growing up, I had heard of TCU because of the prowess of their football team, even back then. So when I learned they had a position open, I thought, "Hey, I've heard of them. They might be an okay place." I don't remember thinking that, explicitly, but I certainly behaved as if I did. In fact the only reason I had heard of them was because of their football team, not because of their economics department.

It turned out they were looking for someone who was willing to teach 4 courses per term ("only" three preparations) and do so for less pay than was offered by other economics departments. I'm sure things have changed since then.

In the end, they weren't interested in me and I wasn't interested in them. But when I saw them playing in the "Impolitic" Bowl this past week, I realized that the reputation created by their football team had at least gotten them in the door with me (so to speak).

National television exposure due to a winning football team is undoubtedly worth something. The question is, how much? And is it worth the costs?

Andre Dawson and the Hall of Fame

Andre Dawson was just elected to Baseball's Hall of Fame. Those of us who watched him when he played with Montreal Expos enjoyed watching him. And there is no doubt he was a VERY good player.

And yet, as many sabremetricians will sure point out, Dawson's performances probably contributed less to his teams' winning percentages than did the performances of Bert Blyleven or Tim Raines or even possibly Jack Morris (I really am having hard time understanding why Robbie Alomar got so many votes).

Let's face it. There is one important reason that Dawson was elected to the MLB Hall of Fame, and it is the same reason he won the National League's Most Valuable Player Award in 1987 despite there being other likely more suitable candidates. Leading up to the 1987 season, Dawson made it clear that because of his ailing knees, he no longer wanted to play on astroturf but with his free agency would seek a contract with a team that had a natural grass outfield. He was especially interested in signing with the Chicago Cubs, but this was 1986-87, and no one would sign him to a contract. No one, despite his potential contributions to a team. 1987 was, it turned out, a year of collusion among MLB teams, and most free agents found no takers other than their original teams (at monopsonistic salaries).

To deal with this collusive situation in the 1987 MLB, Dawson essentially signed a blank contract, gave it to Dallas Green (then general manager of the Cubs) and told him to fill in the numbers. This gesture, plus his overall good performance that season, helped Dawson win the hearts of fans and sportswriters. And it was this gesture that put him over the top in the MVP balloting that year and in the Hall of Fame balloting this year.

Without that action, Andre Dawson would be another very good player just on the cusp of being elected into the Hall of Fame. With it, he became a hero to many who were disgusted by the collusive behaviour of the MLB owners.

Tiger's New Sponsorship? Making the best of a bad situation?

I almost drove off the road when I first saw this billboard.

Is this an ad telling us about some of the remedies available if someone hits you with a 9 iron and smashes your teeth?

Baseball and the Economy: What Happened to Television Ratings?

Attendance at MLB games this past season was 6.9% lower than it had been the previous year. That is a HUGE drop. An intriguing question is, what happened?

1. One possibility is that the rather sudden drop in housing prices and employment led people (individuals AND corporations) to cut back on their spending on entertainment, including baseball. If so, and if people's tastes for baseball haven't changed much, we should expect that the television ratings wouldn't have changed much from 2008 to 2009. In fact, tv viewership might even have increased as more people stay home to watch the game on tv instead going to the ballpark in person. Of course the change in television programming (notably the change at TBS) from one season to the next will have confounded this effect.
   
   Unfortunately, I haven't been able to locate the full season ratings for 2009. One source I did come across said that as of late May, the tv ratings were about the same as they had been the previous season, but that was early in the season.


2. Another possible explanation is that there was only one close play-off race, the AL Central. Most of the other play-off teams were well-decided a week or two or more before the season ended.  If increasing numbers of the races were, in this sense, "less interesting", that, too might have had an impact on attendance at the ballpark. If this hypothesis is correct, then tv ratings should have been lower in 2009 as well, especially near the end of the season.

In other words, the data on television ratings might help us discern the relative strengths of the two hypotheses. Given these competing hypotheses (both of which could be right, of course in varying strengths), can anyone shed any light on what happened with tv ratings this past season?

Damned Day Job Interferes with Watching Baseball

I teach this evening from 5:30 - 6:30 and then have an hour's drive to get home. I'll be lucky if I get home before the last couple of innings of the Tigers - Twins one-game playoff this evening, much less have an opportunity to down a sausage or two and some orange juice before the game ends. Over the regular season, the Twins had a higher SLG and a massively higher OBP than the Tigers, but the Tigers had a lower ERA. It could be close, but after seeing the Tigers fall apart and the Twins play so well over the past few weeks, I will not be surprised if the Twins win big.

Why Are Tennis Commentators SO Full of Themselves?

I was shocked. I was stunned. My friend and co-blogger at Curling, Alan Adamson, wrote on his Facebook page,

Alan Adamson thinks CBS/ESPN has a great team covering tennis - the McEnroe boys, Darren Cahill, and the very fetching Pam Shriver, Mary Jo Fernandez, and Mary Carillo. How did such a team get assembled?

I completely disagree. Earlier this week, when watching the U.S. Open, I found the only way I could bear it was to mute the commentary; and in the end, I actually just turned it off rather than listen to John McEnroe ramble on. And the women commentators need to learn that the show is about tennis, not about them. Cutesy interactions and inane questions just don't cut it for me.

What is it about McEnroe that I can't stand? First let me state up front that, yes, he was a great tennis player, and, yes, he is quite knowledgeable. What I think irritates me is his arrogant yet whiny condescension that both says and implies that if only the players had done what he thought they should, they'd have won the point/game/set/match/whatever.

Update: Alan responds on his own blog.

Hermaphrodite Runner

BenS has suggested that the runner from South Africa would attend classes in Middlesex College if taking classes here at the University of Western Ontario.

World 800-metre champion Caster Semenya of South Africa has male and female sexual organs, the Sydney Morning Herald reported Friday, posing an ethical and political quandary for world track and field's ruling body.

The Herald said extensive physical examinations of the 18-year-old runner ordered by the IAAF have shown she is technically a hermaphrodite.

Medical reports indicate she has no ovaries, but rather has internal male testes, which are producing large amounts of testosterone.

Jack suspects lawyers will have a field day with the case. I agree. And Ben adds, "What about 'he said, she said?'"

I'm very happy not to be on the International Olympic Committee or, in this specific case, on the IAAF. This would truly be a tough nut to crack.

Update: for more on the topic, see this in Salon. [h/t Shannon]

I May Actually Watch an Entire Episode of The Simpsons

It's about curling.

[h/t to Alan Adamson, co-blogger at Curling]

Another Memo to Wimbledon

Is NOBODY televising the ladies doubles championship match? NBC appears to be carrying celebrity golf, and none of the dedicated sports channels is carrying it in our area either. At least we are unable to find any mention of it on our 600 or so channels.

Was no outlet willing to pay for these rights? I suspect that whoever did the media contract negotiating for Wimbledon will or should be looking for a new job soon.

Note to Wimbledon and NBC

It sure is disappointing not to be able to watch some of the Wimbledon tennis matches live. I'm not nearly so interested in watching tape delays or reruns, and I'm especially not interested in watching them when I receive scoring updates, live, every thirty seconds or so on my iPhone. It was pretty silly today, especially, because the Williams-Safina match was nearly completed by the time NBC got around to showing any of it.

If I am like this, I wonder if many other sports fans have similar views. And if that is the case then surely there is some money being left on the table by the contractual combinations that have been negotiated  requiring ESPN not to show some matches (and not even mention the matches or their scores, if they are in progress).

Either NBC should alter its day-time programming so they can show those matches live, or Wimbledon should negotiate contracts that capture more of the surplus.

And note to advertisers: I don't watch as much or as intently if the tennis being shown is tape-delayed. I hope you are not paying as much for that ad time.

Nude Women of Curling: The 2009 Calendar

The 2009 - 2011 calendar featuring exquisitely artful photos of female curlers is available. The photos were posed and/or taken by Ana Arce, herself a curler. You can see most of the photos here. The one below is especially captivating. The side-lighting is very effective.

Yes, this calendar runs for thirty-six months and has 36 different photos. [h/t to Craig Newmark for the pointer]