My impression is that in the NBA, players are a lot closer to fans (wildly cheering or yelling nastily) than in MLB or the NFL.* In the NHL, fans are relatively close but sequestered behind a partially noise-reducing barrier.
So maybe (beyond noise alone) that has something to do with the NBA’s home advantage.
Since shooting/scoring tends to be a streaky thing in professional basketball, possibly it’s easier to get on a prolonged roll when you have the fans behind you.
*the NFL seems to have a monopoly on fans drowning out the visiting teams’ signals.
I never believed that much in human psychology as an advantage per se, but I’m starting to come around. Tight games, particularly those between equally matched teams, may come down to fouls and foul shooting, which are possibly influenced by things like crowd noise.
Quantifying it is difficult, but soccer(football) is also a profoundly home ground advantaged sport
In recognition of this, in the major club competitions, the primary tie breaker is the away goals rule, i.e. one goal scored on the way leg of a tie counts for 2 scored at home
Also, though less empirically, there is the visiting team chant:
"We’re leading away, we’re leading away, how shit must you be, we’re leading away”
AFL used to have but much has evaporated due to centralised venues for the Melbourne teams but the interstate clubs do have about 60% winning records vs travelling teams.
Travelling plus the home crowd effect are in play and additionally there is no standard dimensions for an AFL ground and the locals typically have an advantage in knowing how best to play their back yard.
The outlier is Geelong are based outside Melbourne, who have a 67% winning record in 679 games played since 1941 and 85% since 2005.
Rugby League and Rugby Union club games are played more on a home and away venue basis with NRL home teams winning around 60%.
The main Sydney daily paper runs a standard NRL tipping panel which at one stage was won by Peter Fitzsimmons for 5 years straight.
This really irked the League experts, past coaches and playing greats on the panel because Fitsimmons was a died-in-the-wool Union man who bucketed League in his columns on a very consistent basis.
When he retired from the panel Fitzsimmons revealed his “secret” method … when in doubt back the home team, and further that if a punter had only backed the home team they would have beaten his tally in all five of those years.
You’d expect soccer and baseball to have larger home field advantages, because even the dimensions of the fields can vary, and a team is more used to its home field (in fact, some baseball teams have even adjusted the outfield walls based on their strengths).
With basketball, though, while there may be some subtle quirks to a particular court, they’re much more standardized.
Yes, but more so in the NBA. in the NBA the home team wins 60 percent of the time, more than the other major leagues in North America. It’s 55-57 percent in the NFL, 54-55 in the NHL, and I believe about 54 in baseball.
I am sure the fact baseball has a lower advantage will come as a surprise to many, since there is a clear strategic advantage in batting last and home ballparks can differ in fence dimensions. That said, however, those things don’t usually decide ballgames.
As to why it’s higher in basketball, it’s very hard to ignore the point about crowds. I’ve been to pro games in these sports and the presence of the crowd in an NBA game is incredible. I have seen some fanatic crowds in other sports but it isn’t at all comparable; a Raptors game near the court is like nothing you see in hockey or baseball or football. The crowd is right on top of the players and the refs and they get insane.
Being familiar with say, the Green Monster, could help the home team a bit. But (as I think we’ve discussed) it’s not at all clear to me that batting last is that much of an advantage: the defense has a lot more options than the offense and therefore should benefit more from knowing how many runs are important.
One important point is that in the NBA favorites win much more often, too. This makes sense considering an NBA team has about 100 possessions per game to equalize out a bad bounce or two, while an NFL team has maybe 10 possessions at most – so NFL games are far more influenced by luck. So first thing to do is figure out whether the bigger home advantage in basketball is real or just more visible because there’s less noise in the results.
Home advantage and competitive balance cancel out, though. Bad teams and good teams play the same number of games home and away; the effects of home court advantage and competitive imbalance shouldn’t conflate in the regular season. They will conflate a little in the postseason, because the superior team usually gets an extra home game in each series. I was only quoting regular season figures.
Coincidentally I read a part of “Freakonomics” (or some book by those dudes, it might have been another one) about this very phenomenon, and they cited a study into this issue that concluded it almost certainly was the home crowd and the effect it had on officials.
I knew someone would mention that. And the home team in baseball has some actual advantage. Batting second is at least a psychological advantage, but in ties knowing whether you need only one run or you need more can change your strategy. Also, the defense knows all the quirks of the home field.
In hockey the home team gets to make the last line change. That must be worth something. AFAIK, there is no objective home team advantage in basketball or football.