During their segment with Hub, Parkins asked him about going for 2 vs. kicking the extra point. Parkins did the calculus and it shows that over time you're better off going to 2. Hub said there is more to consider than just the math, such as situation. If you go for 2 one or more times and make it each time in a game in which you end up winning by 17 but go for 2 one or more times in a game you lose by 1 point it doesn't help you very much.

After the segment and Hub was off the phone Parkins did his uh, huh-huh, if you don't care about the math, and probability, I guess you're not interested in having a discussion about it...

I am usually not opposed to people being a douche to Hub, but that's not what he said. He said context is important as well.

Yeah down one after a td and going for two with no time on the clock end of game?

_________________
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.

On paper it makes sense to go for two, practicality not so much. If he becomes too popular, people would figure out how to defend it, and the percentages go down.

If you have a good offense, you should go for 2 in that situation.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

If you go for two 3 times, its like you just kicked a free field goal anyways.

Always go for 2.

_________________
I like thinking big. . . If you're going to be thinking anything, you might as well think big.
-Donald J. Trump, BPE

In general I support going for 2 unless you're down 6 and you score a touchdown.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

Obviously the math dictates that if you can make the 2-pt conv at least 50% of the time, it's better in the long run. But individual games are not the long run. If Hub was simply saying the situation may call for going for the PAT instead of 2, he's absolutely correct. I can't believe Parkins, Mr. Gambler, would dispute that.

_________________

That was Hubert's point.

this reminds me of the time i was drunk and stupid and thought i could make money playing red/black on roulette.... if i lose i just double my bet... if i lose that i double my bet... well eventually the odds say your going to run in to a streak where the "double amount" is more than the money you have on hand.

tl;dr... just kick the damn extra point you horizontal running game hipster douche

Is this show preempted for preseason Illini basketball?

_________________

Yea, I know.

Kinda sounds like a certain poster’s position about pitchers pitching the game in front of them. Hmmm...interesting...

_________________
We all have private ails. The troublemakers are they who need public cures for their private ails.- Eric Hoffer

That’s the best time to go for two. Separates the alphas from the regular men.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

Unless there are extenuating circumstances, you should never go for 2 if you are up 3,8,16,24. Other than that I understand the thought process.

_________________

I've always found behavior like that to be somewhat cowardly. If you have a disagreement with a guest, do it politely but firmly and give him a chance to respond.

Hard to argue.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

The Mike Vrabel Special.

_________________

It's a great theory if you have infinite money.

_________________

The other day, the North Shore Dans were jerking each other off in transition about how amazing it is that the Really Smart People found these obvious solutions -- home runs are better than not home runs! three-pointers are better than two-pointers! going for two is better than going for one! -- and I gotta say, the only thing that sounds lamer than arriving at these conclusions is expressing amazement with those who did.

_________________

Denied. Anyone sneak dissing Smug Arbush has my full support.

_________________
-- source

Extra points are making at a rate of about 95% now. That means you have to convert more than 47.5% of your 2 point conversions to score more points and any competent offense should be able to do that.

The only real time you shouldn't do it is in a last minute situation where the difference between 1 point and 2 points is meaningless while the difference between 0 points and 1 points is huge. For instance, scoring with 2 minutes to go with a chance to go up either 9 or 10.

There should never be an extra point kicked in the first three quarters again unless there was a penalty that moved the offense back.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

that's nothing

If he had any balls he would advocate for the statistically supportable philosophy of never punting to see if he could take that criticism

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

Isn't there some beef between Parkins and Hub? I mean unrelated to this specific point, but wasn't there some Twitter tiff?

A boy can dream.

It's time to mostly get rid of punting too.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

Always go for 2. Unless you're trying to tie it ala Panthers last week

Parkins just said he has been gambling since he was 16, just turned 32, and has a losing record in terms of betting.

Shouldn't someone who is such a vocal proponent of math, logic, and who says things like "I think you have to agree if you subscribe to logic like I do." be better at playing the odds?

Scoring a touchdown when down 7 is the most interesting question, IMHO -- if you can force OT with a successful PAT, or win with a 2 pt conversion, what is the strategy? I think it comes down to if you think you are better than your opponent (meaning, you really think so, not just the BS you are spewing to everyone who asks.) If you are better, then you should be fine with OT. If you think you are worse, then you try for 2 to win it.

Other situations, if you have a decent offense, you should probably be going for 2 most of the time. Again, you only need to hit it 50% of the time to draw even to a 100% PAT ratio. You should have plays drawn up specifically for going for two. You should have plays drawn up for 4th and 1 or 2 from your own 45 yard line IMHO.

_________________
"All crowds boycotting football games shouldn't care who sings or takes a knee because they aren't watching." - Nas

That can be applied to baseball too. Guys like Bernstein act as if the season is one long game. It doesn't work that way. It's even more pronounced in football where a single loss can destroy a season.

_________________
Don't take it personally.

Isn't the old adage "win at home, tie on the road"?

_________________

There's also an old adage about not passing because two of the three things that can happen are bad, but now you have completion, defensive holding, defensive pass interference, roughing the passer vs incompletion, interception, offensive pass interference, so it is 4 to 3 to pass.

_________________
"All crowds boycotting football games shouldn't care who sings or takes a knee because they aren't watching." - Nas