Supercross 2017: Arlington -- Predictions Review
2/13/2017
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/80a88/80a88713928aa7a16f78e9cc66fe82cf70e5c1b9" alt="Preview: The MX Book Preview: The MX Book"
How did the "This Week" predictions do for Supercross week 6 at Arlington? I think you could probably answer that without looking. Riders' results last week were all over the place for a variety of reasons including at least two flat tires.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4d918/4d9182ed0771054e69b8ee8841f870359464ae19" alt=""
If there's any silver lining from the Top 10, it would be that the biggest misses were somewhat freak results. Eli Tomac had brake problem, Cooper Webb had a flat tire, Trey Canard was returning from injury, and Chad Reed also had a flat tire.
Stadium/Track Adjustments
Since the Stadium/Track Adjustment is still a bit of a work in progress (The MX Book goes through it in detail, with encouraging conclusions), I highlight the major ones each week to see if the riders' finishing spots were better or worse at the Supercross stadium -- that is, in line with the prediction or not.
Just like last week, there was 1 major Stadium/Track Adjustment and a few moderate ones for the 450's. Unlike last week, I wouldn't read too much into the results, although they did line up pretty well with the adjustments. I will list the 3 biggest to compare how the adjustment compared with the apparent effect of the stadium:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/51301/513011bae2b84ae18dd838fd99484165a046cff2" alt=""
The largest Track Adjustment, for Malcolm Stewart, expected him to do 5 points better at AT&T Stadium than at the average track. Before the adjustment, he was predicted to earn 6 points (10.9 points after the adjustment), and he earned 11 -- a difference of 5 points. That's +5.0 (predicted effect) vs +5 (actual effect), so the adjustment was essentially correct.
Reed was predicted to do 1.2 points worse at AT&T Stadium than at the average track; because of his flat tire, he earned 12 fewer than predicted -- so he did worse, as predicted, but take that with a grain of salt.
Jason Anderson was predicted to do 0.9 points better at AT&T, and he did 0.2 points better. His result was technically in the correct direction, but much smaller. Because of the points structure at 2nd/3rd/4th he could only be 2.2 points better, 0.2 points better, or 1.8 points worse -- so it's hard to have a precise match in this case.
Not a lot to say about predicting Arlington's results, other than the race seemed to go haywire, as did the predictions. Next week in Minneapolis should be interesting as it's a fairly unique race that should provide quite a different environment than any of the California/Arizona/Texas sites.
Posted by: SagehenMacGyver47 ::: As always – Feedback welcomed
Previous: 2017 Supercross Week 6 -- By-The-Numbers Recap: Arlington | Back to Blog | Next: Supercross 2017 Predictions -- Update After Week 6