Here’s a look at the Week 1 leaders in fantasy points by position. In order to be listed under a position, you must have completed a minimum number of attempts (passes, rushes, receptions) at that position.This leads to a few quirks like Joe Mixon appearing on the WR list and not the RB list (he only carried the ball 5 times, not enough to make the RB list). Wendell Smallwood of West Virginia appears on the RB and WR list.The fantasy points are calculated using FanDuel’s scoring system. I don’t claim these to be 100 percent accurate – I gathered the numbers from the (awesome) College Football Play Index, which I trust, but I don’t include any return stats and there may be other things missed (fumbles, etc.). This is just for fun, in other words.QuarterbacksRunning backsWide ReceiversIf you’re looking for the comments section, it has moved to our forum, The Chamber. You can go there to comment and holler about these articles, specifically in these threads. You can register for a free account right here and will need one to comment.If you’re wondering why we decided to do this, we wrote about that here. Thank you and cheers!
Ian Matthew, Tony Trad, Adam Foley and Gary Croft have all been nominated for awards, with the winners to be announced at a black tie event at Bicentennial Park. Australian Men’s Open coach, Tony Trad, has been named as a finalist for Coach of the Year alongside Brant Best, coach of 100 metre Freestyle World Champion, James Magnussen, New South Wales Swifts assistant coach, Robert Wright, 2011 Australian amateur Football Coach of the Year, Brett Wallin and 2011 New South Wales Surf Life Saving Coach of the Year, Downie Langthorne. Recently inducted Touch Football Australia Life Member, Ian Matthew, is a finalist in the Volunteer of the Year award category, and is joined by Cudgen Headland Surf Life Saving Club President, Gary Cain, and New South Wales Under 18’s Hockey coach, Richard Willis. Trad and Matthew are nominated for their awards following being recognised for their outstanding contribution to the sport of Touch Football at the New South Wales Sports Volunteer Awards in December last year. Matthew and Trad were both nominated by NSWTA and won their respective categories, New South Wales Sport Volunteer Official of the Year and New South Wales Sport Volunteer Coach of the Year. Trad says that to receive the Volunteer Coach of the Year award and to then be nominated for the Coach of the Year at the upcoming awards is ‘mind blowing’. “I was just so proud to get the volunteer award, and I didn’t really at any stage contemplate that I would be nominated for the final of the general one. It’s just unbelievable to be honest with you, I can’t quite believe it. To get Adam and Ian (nominated) as well, it’s just a big tick for our sport and great recognition that it probably deserves,” Trad said. 2011 World Cup Men’s Open grand final referee, Adam Foley, has been named a finalist for the Official of the Year category alongside Australian Netball umpire and 2010 New South Wales Sports Official of the Year, Sharon Kelly, and FISA rowing official, Greg Smith. 2011 NSWTA Rod Wise Medallist for Volunteer of the Year and Parramatta Touch Association President, Gary Croft, has been named as one of 17 people to receive a Distinguished Long Service award.Stay tuned to the Touch Football Australia website for all of the results and news from the awards.
Chelsea youngster Gilmour full of pride for Cup winby Paul Vegasa month agoSend to a friendShare the loveChelsea youngster Billy Gilmour was full of pride after his contribution for their 7-1 Carabao Cup win over Grimsby Town.Deployed in a deep-lying central midfield role, Gilmour grew into the game, and in the second half was arguably the standout performer. “It was a really good feeling to make my full debut, and it was really good to get the win,” said Gilmour to chelseafc.com.”It was breathtaking. It was a great night to walk out in front of all the Chelsea fans. And the boys performed really well. You could see the attacking threat we had with the goals.”The gaffer has come in and wants to play the youth. It’s been really good experience for us and the we’re gaining confidence from it. I have worked hard for this so it wasn’t a shock, but I had to step up and show what I’m capable of. I think I played well.” About the authorPaul VegasShare the loveHave your say
But some players matter just as much as the year or surface. The difference between Dustin Brown, the fastest player with at least 50 matches, and Nicolas Massu, the slowest, is 12.6 seconds per point — bigger than the difference between the slowest and fastest years, or slowest and fastest tournaments.7All the player data is relative to retired American Aaron Krickstein, again chosen because he came first in alphabetical order. Since he played slightly faster than average for his time, the regression output shows the average player as contributing time to matches, so is best used to compare players to each other, and not as an absolute number. I’m listing only players with findings significant at the p<0.02 level — a stricter standard than p<0.05 to be more confident in the findings, but not quite as strict as p<0.01, which eliminated many more players — both for matches they won and for those they lost. My method found different estimates for winners and losers, but they were highly correlated — r-squared = 0.76 — so I combined them to form a single measure for each player, weighting the two estimates by his number of wins and losses in the data set. That’s the estimate shown in the following table. We’ve posted pace estimates for 218 players and for 205 events on GitHub.This analysis isn’t only about how much time players take between points. The official stats don’t break out that number. A player can affect the pace of play both by how much time he takes between points — mainly when serving — and how much time it takes him to play a point. Players who are fast between points but engage in epic rallies during them — such as Monfils — don’t show up as outliers. Nadal, meanwhile, is slow between points and also plays many long rallies.To check what I was capturing, I went back to Little Data. Using my trusty smartphone stopwatch function, I timed how long 15 players took to serve at the French Open. Then I correlated the time they took between each serve with the time the analysis showed they add to the average point. The two quantities had a fairly high correlation, suggesting that the players who add time to matches do so at least in large part by adding time between points.8The 15 players were as follows: Faster than Aaron Krickstein: Nicolas Almagro, Roger Federer, Daniel Gimeno Traver, John Isner, Andrey Kuznetsov, Nick Kyrgios, Benoit Paire, Lukas Rosol, Bernard Tomic. Slower: Pablo Andujar, Carlos Berlocq, Borna Coric, Novak Djokovic, Andy Murray, Rafael Nadal. I measured time before 120 of their serves between Thursday and Saturday. They were playing on courts at the same facility, in roughly the same weather conditions. The r-squared for the correlation was 0.44. The serve speed data also is on GitHub.Playing slow puts players in good company. Some of the greatest players of all time do or did: Nadal, Djokovic and Murray join fellow multiple-Slam-winners Jimmy Connors, Jim Courier, Ivan Lendl and John McEnroe, who were all slow, albeit relative to their cohorts’ faster times. But slower players are only marginally better: There is essentially no correlation between career winning percentage and relative speed of play.9r-squared=0.01 Great players like Federer and 2001 Wimbledon champ Goran Ivanisevic played faster than average.My analysis assumed each player maintains the same pace throughout his career, but anyone can change his pace of play. To find out who has, I compared actual and expected pace for each match10By inserting the regression coefficients, so I was controlling for opponent, surface, year and other factors.:Nadal is vexed that time has become such a pressing topic lately. “I don’t know why but is very interesting that we are talking a lot about time the last three years,” he said in response to a question of mine at a news conference here at the French Open. “I have been on the tour for 13 years, so for the first 10 years I have been on the tour I don’t think I was quicker than now, and we were not talking about that.” Nadal was so peeved by one umpire’s enforcement of time rules earlier this year that he asked for the ump to be removed from his upcoming matches, a request that was granted.Murray knows sometimes he is too slow. “I don’t mean to do it,” he said. Then again, it’s hard to know when he’s taking too much time. “Are we supposed to spend the 25 seconds before you serve counting in your head to 25? No, you’re thinking about tactics or, you know, other things, what you’re about to do with the serve, where you’re going to play the serve. And, yeah, sometimes you can go too slow.”Since Murray and Nadal grew tired of all the time questions, I asked some of today’s fastest players why they push the pace. All of them said that’s always been their style.Australian Bernard Tomic said he plays fast deliberately. He told me that mixing up pace between points is another way to throw off opponents, like changing the speed or spin of the ball. “Everyone plays differently,” Tomic said. “That’s the weapon you have these days.”Lukas Rosol, a Czech player, and American Sam Querrey both said they like to get into a rhythm when serving. Waiting too long between points can break that up. Querrey gets annoyed when he has to wait too long to return, and he figures spectators do, too. “Sports that are popular are ones that have pretty good pace of play,” he said. Some players told The Washington Post they want the game sped up, such as by forcing servers to hit their first ball toss, no matter how errant.On Monday, during Nadal’s slow-paced match against Sock, I caught up with some more outliers among retired greats at a joint news conference to promote the seniors tournament. The ex-players’ sense of their own pace generally squared with the analysis.“I didn’t take any time,” said Ivanisevic, the 2001 Wimbledon champ. “I just liked to play fast.” He recalled playing Agassi, another fast player, in a five-setter that took two hours. He was a bit off, but the match was still pretty fast for a five-setter, taking two hours and 50 minutes. Ivanisevic has to watch a lot of tennis these days, as coach of defending U.S. Open champ Marin Cilic, and he wishes players would move faster. “Maybe they should go to the towel just half the time,” he said.Michael Chang, the 1989 French Open champ, correctly guessed that he was somewhere in between Ivanisevic and Nadal in pace. He doesn’t blame Nadal: “A guy like Rafa, he sweats profusely,” Chang said.So did Pat Cash, the 1987 Wimbledon champ. “I was one of the sweatiest players in the history of the game,” he said. He also often ended points at the net, so he needed time to walk back to the baseline. Nonetheless, he used to rush as a young player, until he was taught to slow down — so slow, he was one of the slowest players, relative to his era.Cash thinks that the sport, with its protracted baseline rallies, is better today, and that there’s nothing wrong with players taking a 30-second break after a rally at least that long. “Spectators have got to catch their breath,” he said. Nine-time French Open champ Rafael Nadal is one of the slowest players of the last 25 years. Roger Federer is faster than average. Novak Djokovic is slower than average — but has gotten faster. Andy Murray, on the other hand, has slowed down.I’m not talking about foot speed, or about the speed of the ball off the racket. I’m talking about how long it takes to play a point of tennis. Like baseball, tennis isn’t bound by a clock, but it does keep time. A match isn’t over until one player wins two sets or three. And who the players are goes a long way to deciding how long it takes to go from start to finish.The topic has been especially urgent at this year’s French Open, which lacks a roof and floodlights and must squeeze in play between darkness and rain. If Djokovic and Murray played slightly faster, they might have finished their semifinal Friday. Instead the match was suspended at 3-3 in the fourth set because of an imminent storm at around 8:30 p.m. local time. That will force the winner of the match to play three days in a row, which could be a disadvantage in the final.For an illustration of how much pace matters, consider two four-set matches that finished Monday in Paris. Speedy Roger Federer finished off relatively fast Gael Monfils in two hours and 12 minutes, taking 36 seconds per point. Rafael Nadal’s defeat of Jack Sock, on the other hand, required two fewer points but 41 more minutes; it took 47 seconds per point. All those seconds add up fast.1The Federer match was much faster than Nadal’s even though it had more long rallies: 36 of nine or more shots, compared with 27 in the Nadal match.Before just about every serve, Nadal went through most parts of his usual ritual: He cleaned the baseline with his foot, tapped his shoes with his racket to knock the clay off, rejected one of the three balls he was offered, bounced one of the others with his racket while with his right hand he picked at the back of his shorts, dried his face and the area behind his ears, rubbed his hand on his shirt, rocked back and forth — and served. When he missed the first serve, he did some of the same things on his second serve, including picking at the back of his shorts and rocking back and forth.Players are allowed no more than 20 seconds between serves at Grand Slams225 seconds at ATP World Tour events; if they exceed that threshold twice and are called for it, they lose a first serve. Some players stretch and shrink the time as a tactic to rest or throw off opponents.Over several games and sets, slower play can add 15 minutes or more to a match, throwing off television schedules and testing the patience of fans. It matters enough to the ATP, which runs the men’s tour, that it cracked down on slow play two years ago by enforcing the rules more strictly. Then again, thrilling long rallies take longer and create longer breaks in between, so a slowdown could be a good sign for the sport.I’ve studied the question of what determines the length of a match before, using Little Data: stopwatching the time between a few hundred points, correlating with rally length and other factors. But now we have easy access to big data in tennis. Analyst Jeff Sackmann has posted to GitHub match stats for the last 25 years of the men’s tour. (Match stats for the women’s tour aren’t available.3The WTA, which runs the women’s tour, hasn’t cracked down on slow play like the ATP has with the men. And the men notice. Just after the ATP became stricter, in early 2013, men and women both played an Australian Open warmup event in Brisbane. Andy Murray recalled in a news conference last week that men timed women’s matches and complained that 35-second delays weren’t being penalized, while men were dinged for going two seconds over their limit.) There are nearly 25 years of matches in there — 71,027 in all,4The database was updated through April 27 when I downloaded it. Tennis data is imperfect, including some errors in the historical record. I scrapped all matches with no time info, plus other oddballs (including matches with stats that looked wrong, like a handful of matches with points that averaged less than 15 seconds or more than six and a half minutes). and enough variables for us to tease out which factors have the biggest effect on how long matches take. Like I did last year with baseball games, I ran a regression to see how each of a match’s building blocks affects how long it takes, per point.5I used R. The dependent variable was time divided by points. The variables I included started with the breakdown of points in the match, by type. More precisely, these variables were the percentage of points that were followed by: changeovers after the first game of a set, when there is no prolonged break; changeovers later in sets, with longer breaks; ends of sets; end of matches by one player winning the requisite number of sets; end of matches by retirement; end of matches by default; all other ends of games; tiebreaker changeovers, when players switch side in tiebreakers, after each six points; tiebreaker changes of serve, after an odd number of points; and all other tiebreaker points. I also included four groups of dummy variables: the year of the match; the tournament-surface (treating Madrid’s clay tournament separately from the old Madrid hard-court event and from Rome’s clay event); the winner; and the loser. (We’ve uploaded part of my findings on Github for all to see.)In the early 1990s, the era in which Pete Sampras served-and-volleyed to success and Andre Agassi rushed from one side of the court to the other between serves, the game sped up. Then, starting in the late 1990s, as play shifted to baseline battles, it slowed down — until 2012, when the average point took 4.6 seconds longer than in 1991, all else equal. That doesn’t sound like much, but it amounts to 19 extra minutes over 250 points, a typical number for a best-of-five-set match.In 2012, the five-set Australian Open final between Nadal and Djokovic took five hours and 53 minutes, and raised cries for the game to speed up. The next year, the ATP answered by encouraging umpires to call time violations more strictly — and it appears to have worked. That year play sped up by 2.6 seconds per point, and it has remained roughly at that level since.Surface matters, too. The four fastest tournaments were on grass — with Wimbledon the fastest. The 11 slowest were on clay. Grass encourages the fastest rallies in the sport, which take less time and require less recovery. Clay is at the other extreme.6Because of the nature of the regression, I had to choose one event to serve as the benchmark for all others. So I went with the first one listed when the events were lined up in alphabetical order. All the speed data is relative to data from 1998 to 2007 for ‘s-Hertogenbosch, a grass tournament in the Netherlands. Since it’s played on a relatively fast surface, the regression output shows the average tournament as contributing time to matches, so is best used to compare tournaments to each other, and not as an absolute number. Also note that some of the names were formatted inconsistently, so a few tournaments appear more than once, covering different time periods. That doesn’t affect our findings for other types of variables.
Facebook Twitter Google+LinkedInPinterestWhatsAppTurks and Caicos, April 14, 2017 – Providenciales – Both Carifta Teams are off to their respective games now… we caught up with TeamTCIs swim and athletics athletes who will spend the Easter Holiday either competing on the track in Curacao or in the pool in The Bahamas.Six will swim, and while winning medals would be a great plus, coach Jen Martel says this go round the growing team is going after experience and personal best times. “We want to be competitive with the other swimmers, even if we’re not in the top three yet, and with swimming we’re really big on competing against themselves and learning to build a team. With doing these small goals we’ve got six swimmers this year which is the most ever, we’re hoping next year have a few more, and next year maybe do relays which we haven’t been able to do for swimming yet. So, building it from here and then a few years down the road, hopefully bringing home some hardware.”The group left late yesterday due to an air traffic controllers’ strike in Nassau, Bahamas but are there now. The athletics team arrived safely last night in Curacao, we spoke to coach Ali Smith at the airport who told us the events to watch. “You’re going to see most of our athletes throughout 100, 200, 400, 800 and 1500 meters.”The Carifta Games for track and field are carried on Flow, which is the exclusive broadcast partner.#MagneticMediaNews#TCICariftaTeams#CariftateamsheadtoBahamasandCuracao Related Items:#CariftateamsheadtoBahamasandCuracao, #magneticmedianews, #TCICariftaTeams Facebook Twitter Google+LinkedInPinterestWhatsApp
Hilton opens the first-ever Tru by HiltonHilton today celebrated the grand opening of the first-ever Tru by Hilton – the company’s 5,000th hotel – at Tru by Hilton Oklahoma City Airport. With more than 425 hotels in various stages of development, Tru by Hilton has achieved the fastest growing pipeline in the history of the hospitality industry, and has captured approximately 2/3 of all net pipeline growth associated with the midscale segment since it launched in 2016.Developed from the ground up using consumer and owner feedback, and brought to market in just 16 months from when it launched at the Americas Lodging Investment Summit (ALIS), Tru by Hilton is a brand-new hotel experience that is vibrant, affordable and young-at-heart. It is energetic, but it is relaxing and comfortable. It is familiar, and it is also unexpected. It is uniquely Tru.“For nearly 100 years, Hilton has delivered exceptional hospitality to millions of travelers through our world-class brands and industry-leading innovations,” said Christopher J. Nassetta, president and CEO, Hilton. “Today we are pleased to celebrate our first Tru by Hilton—a brand we launched with the goal of reinventing the midscale segment by providing guests with a contemporary, consistent and fresh experience at a great value.”Tru by Hilton thinks differently and is a game changer in the midscale segment:All new-build brand, which drives the consistency of experience for our guestsReimagined, enlarged lobby with 2,880 square feet of public space with areas to work, play games, eat or loungeBreakfast is reinvented with the build-your-own complimentary “Top It” breakfast bar that has 30 sweet and savory toppings so guests can create their own healthy or indulgent morning masterpiecesRooms are modern and designed to make every square foot count, with natural light from oversized windows, 55” TV with 150 DIRECTV channels and bright all-shower bathrooms with premium bath amenitiesNational and local brand gourmet snacks and drinks – including single-serve beer and wine – are available 24/7 in the “Eat. & Sip.” market located in the heart of the lobbyTech savvy hotel with mobile check-in, Digital Key, free superfast Wi-Fi, remote printing, social media wall, lobby and market iPads, super-charging stations and accessibility to outlets everywhereA fitness center that leverages the latest fitness trends through barre, TRX bands, free weights, cardio and flexibility gear, plus guests can get workout ideas from the fitness center tabletAll the benefits of a Hilton Honors membership are available to Tru by Hilton guests“Tru by Hilton appeals to a cross-generation of travelers who share a zest for life mindset and appreciate minimal yet meaningful amenities and design,” says Alexandra Jaritz, global head, Tru by Hilton. “With Tru by Hilton, these travelers don’t have to choose between a great experience and price in the midscale segment—they now can get the best of both worlds.”Tru by Hilton Oklahoma City Airport boasts 86 rooms and is conveniently located near Will Rogers World Airport. The property is owned by Champ Patel at Champion Hotels, LLC.“We are proud to bring the first Tru by Hilton property to market and want to thank all the Tru Team Members who have made today possible,” said Champ Patel, CEO, Champion Hotels, LLC. “We believe in the potential of this transformative brand, and are very excited to bring 15 other Tru by Hilton properties to life in cities across the country.”The grand opening of Tru by Hilton Oklahoma City Airport will begin at 8:30 a.m. CT today. Hilton CEO Christopher Nassetta, Oklahoma City Mayor Mick Cornett, Global Head of Tru by Hilton Alexandra Jaritz and industry-leading property developer Champ Patel will offer remarks. True to the brand’s personality, the event will feature “wow” moments, celebrity appearances and a “Live from the Tru Blu Carpet” Facebook Live event on facebook.com/hiltonnewsroom from 8:30–9:00 a.m. CT.The opening of the first Tru by Hilton and Hilton’s 5,000th property milestone come on the heels of several other major growth milestones, including the opening of the 100th properties in both Greater China and Latin America. In January 2017, Hilton successfully completed the spin-offs of Hilton Grand Vacations and Park Hotels & Resorts, creating a capital-light business that responds to market conditions, owner needs and evolving customer expectations. Tru by HiltonSource = Hilton Worldwide
By Alexei Medved, World Money Analyst Since my May column, the Russian market got hit badly. The popular US$ denominated RTS index fell 10.2% from 1489 to 1337. The developing financial crisis in Europe pushed investors into the “risk-off” mode, hence all risky assets were sold. This led to strong selling pressure on the Russian market as it is seen as high beta. A significant decline in the crude oil price also helped investors to justify selling Russian assets. As investors rushed into the perceived (perhaps wrongly so) safety of the US dollar, the USD/rouble exchange rate declined by about 6%, further magnifying the decline in the US$ prices for Russian equities. However, unless one believes that the oil price is headed lower and will stay low for a long time (a very unlikely scenario in our view), this correction could represent a good buying opportunity. We don’t know if the global market correction has bottomed or if continued weakness lay ahead. The Russian market could continue its descent should the global financial crisis persist. Also, don’t overlook the fact that Russian macro economic fundamentals remain strong. Inflation is down to a range of 6%, and GDP growth is projected at 4.9% in 2012. Foreign currency reserves are over US$500 billion, the world’s third largest after China and Japan. And the government debt-to-GDP ratio is under 10%, a welcome difference from highly indebted Western European countries and the USA. The Central Bank of Russia has enough flexibility to react to potential external shocks to the Russian economy, and to support its banking system in a stress scenario. Leveraged play on growth of the Russian economy Today, I will focus on the shares of a prominent Russian bank. Over the last 20 years, it has been transformed from the only savings bank in a country with a centrally planned economy, into a profit oriented institution with a greatly reduced headcount and significantly improved management. It remains majority government owned, but 40% of its equity trades on the Russian exchange and as an ADR on a Western exchange. There are concrete plans for the government to sell a part of its stake, possibly this year. The ADRs declined concurrent with the drop in the general markets, and shows that the market is not focused on the company’s underlying strength. This is a significant and unjustified sell-off, in our view, and represents a good buying opportunity. The bank’s fundamentals are very strong. The company has an extensive branch network in Russia and is funded primarily by customers’ deposits, rather than relying on wholesale funding (borrowing on the interbank market or issuing bonds) which led to problems for some Western banks. The bank is also very profitable. Based on recently published results, its Return on Equity, Return on Assets, and Net Operating Margin are all far superior to major Western banks. Profitable operations continue, with strong growth in lending and deposits. The company has a very strong capital position, with Tier 1 capital figures that compare favourably with major Western banks. The bank agreed to a large acquisition deal that will give it a footprint in a fast growing and profitable market outside Russia. Despite these strong fundamentals, the shares are trading at a mid-single-digit P/E and a low P/BV. These valuations represent a 34% discount to its Global Emerging Market peers and a 30% discount to the shares’ historical average valuations. In summary, this bank is a leveraged play on the Russian economy. If the economy does well, the shares are likely to appreciate significantly. At the same time, being a majority government controlled bank in Russia, should the global crisis deteriorate, and the Russian economy start having difficulties, the company is highly likely to receive support from the government and Russia’s Central Bank. To find out the name of the Russian bank and get the full analysis, as well as access to the WMA archives where you’ll learn about other international investing opportunities, take a 100% risk free test drive of the World Money Analyst. [Alexei Medved was born and raised in Russia and later moved to the West. He received an MBA from Wharton Business School and worked for a major global investment bank, where, from 1989, he developed the East European investment banking business. Since 1992, he has been running an independent business which concentrates on investments in Russia and the CIS.]