« "Marine Corps motto is do or die" | Main | NASA climate data found to be of poor quality »

Batman is a scientist.

Ahoy all, it's your resident worst writer on the site back again to confound and befuddle you with more meaningless drivel. Now anyone with a lick of pop culture in their bodies recognizes the title of this tome as a line from The Simpsons season 4 classic "Marge vs. the Monorail". To set the scene - Springfield has been swindled out of a windfall by a Harold Hill-type promising wonderment and jobs with a monorail. At the end, monorail conductor Homer is trapped in the cockpit of a packed, hurtling-to-its-doom train built with substandard parts. Marge arrives and calls Homer on the radio:

M: There's a man here who thinks he can save you.
H: Is it Batman?
M: No, he's a scientist.
H: Batman is a scientist.
M: It's not Batman.

Which really has nothing to do with anything other than the fact I was cracking up thinking about it at work today. That is until I came across an interesting little fluff piece about some mathematician who has created a model to predict the outcome of the upcoming (yawn) baseball season down to the number of games each team will win. Mathematician would be considered a scientist, right, at least depending on what they actually do and level of degree. Someone's got a PhD in math and you think, whoa, far out, check out Professor Brainiac. Someone's got a PhD in English and you think, didn't I ask for my secret sauce on the side and extra cheese?

Anyway, he's probably a pretty sharp cat.

Derek Jeter, Albert Pujols and baseball's other greats have barely begun spring training, but a mathematician from New Jersey already knows what kind of season they'll have.
Bukiet bases his predictions on a mathematical model he developed in 2000, one that computes the probability of a team winning a game against another team with given hitters, bench, starting pitcher, relievers and home field advantage. For this season, Bukiet has refined his algorithm slightly, incorporating a more realistic runner advancement model. Whatever that is.

The professor claims to have beaten the odds in six of the eight years he's been using the model.

He's given himself a rather broadly subjective definition of success - "beaten the odds". Six out of eight years ain't too shabby, but before we go all Winston Wolf it would be interesting to know exactly how he defines beating the odds. Significantly better than a prediction generated randomly? Better than the line in Vegas?

Bukiet also applies his mathematical modeling to gambling, in particular for understanding baseball and cricket. He posts his analysis online at www.egrandslam.com.

"I publish these numbers to promote the power and relevance of math," he says. "We've long had a problem convincing U.S. youngsters to embrace mathematics in school. Studying how math applies to baseball demonstrates not only that math can be fun, but how it is really a part of things people care about."

Heh, cricket. It's like baseball only less boring.

I hope he makes a tidy little profit doing it too. The quintessential American dream of earning a living doing something you love. While baseball itself is a game, there is science behind the game and its statistics are ripe for analysis. Fundamentally, pretty much any activity can be broken down and analyzed scientifically. Taylor remade the modern workplace with science. Walk through a grocery store and marvel at the scientific miracle that is product placement.

One thing his model couldn't possibly predict is the effect of unexpected situations such as injuries. Math, regardless of how sound, can't predict the random, chaotic events endemic to life on Earth. Beyond the unforeseen, any mathematical model is only as good as the data from which it generates its output. Baseball statistics are well documented and recorded consistently by MLB, so it would be easy to go back 100 years to create a data set that would choke the most powerful super computers.

So here we've got a scientist who has taken meticulously documented data publicly available to anyone with an Internet connection and devised a simulation of an entire baseball season and posted his predictions. Given that, how many of you would be willing to wager your next three months' pay on his predictions? Or better yet, one month's pay per year based on the results of this year's prediction for the rest of your life and your children's lives and their children's lives?

No takers? Funny. The IPCC, Obama, most of the Democrats, McCain, Graham, and a handful of other addlepated Republicans want to wager $800 billion in the short term and $ trillions in economic growth over the next 90 years based on computer simulations of a similarly chaotic, uncoupled, non-linear combination of factors known as climate. Only no one can see the data. That data is gathered from diverse, dissimilar sources and "adjusted" to a "standard" measurement criteria defined by the modelers. And unlike Professor Bukiet's model, climate models fail to accurately recreate the climate history we know from the data sets they're fed without further "adjustment".

That, my friends, is what the folks in Vegas call a sucker bet.

Sucker bets do come in sometimes. Someone will hit an exacta at the Derby. But building our energy future on farcical, expensive, sporadically operable solar panels/windmills based on what is essentially a random probability is heads we lose, tails we lose. Cheap and abundant energy is the only winning future and we've already set ourselves back 20 years from where we need to be in electricity generating capacity.

Batman is a scientist and he isn't eradicating Gotham City's arch-villains driving a plug-in hybrid Batmobile or piloting a solar Batwing. Taking our cues from Bruce Wayne makes about as much sense as wagering our energy future on silly computer games.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (9)

There are lot of job... (Below threshold)

There are lot of jobs in medical billing find a school to get a degree in few months from http://ow.ly/1ggKF

Nice post, Baron.H... (Below threshold)
Sky Captain:

Nice post, Baron.

However, you are using logic and dealing with "climate change". There is the flaw in your post - there is NO logic in the minds of those who believe in this "climate change".

Since we're betting on stuf... (Below threshold)

Since we're betting on stuff, I bet no liberal trolls read far enough to find out this post is an "attack" on the global warming scam.

True story.

Going, going, GONE BABY!! -... (Below threshold)


re:3I bet some thi... (Below threshold)


I bet some think the title is Blackman is a Scientologist.

I pretty much agree on your... (Below threshold)

I pretty much agree on your assessment on the Manmade Global Warming scam. However your understanding of mathematical analysis is lacking. Yes we would need to know what is meant by "beaten the odds" to understand if his model has "possible" significance. Since eight years is a small sample, the accuracy of it in predicting other sports is important to consider.

But back to the basics. Many Mathematical models are an attempt to predict nature. The process takes known data to develop models and in that process they develop what quality of data they need and what additional data they need. And yes they also try and often do take in account affect of random events.

The big mistake people make is they think that just because a scientist develop a model that it is accurate. In reality they will develop many many inaccurate models before they come up with one that is somewhat accurate. That is part of the process. Even then it seldom will be 100% absolutely right. Unfortunately too many treat them that way.

If this mathematician can come up with a model that predicts wins 80% of the time in several sports and in several year sets, then I say he has something. Would I bet everything on one game prediction? No but I would bet money using it over several sports over the whole year.

As for the current climate models, I wouldn't bet anything on future prediction by them.

Batman is a scientist and B... (Below threshold)

Batman is a scientist and Barry is a socialist!

Yeah, I see the parallels.

At least Batman had the boy Wonder! All Hussein has is a balding third world wanna be cheerleader named jo!

Agree re AGW, but quit diss... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Agree re AGW, but quit dissing baseball, where some sportsmanship can still be found, unlike football and basketball, whose professional participants for the most part belong in/ have been/ will be in prison.

Baron, you're far from bein... (Below threshold)

Baron, you're far from being the "worst writer on the site" as long as Paul Hoosen sticks around! He manages to make all the rest of you look like Dostoevskys. Keep up the good work.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy