IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_2187.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Penalty-Duel and Institutional Design: Is there a Neeskens-Effect?

Author

Listed:
  • Wolfgang Leininger
  • Axel Ockenfels

Abstract

We document an increase in the scoring probability from penalties in soccer, which separates the time period before 1974 significantly from that after 1976: the scoring probability increased by 11%.We explain this finding by arguing that the institution of penalty-shooting before 1974 is best described as a standard of behaviour for striker and goal-keeper, which in game-theoretic terms represents a 2x2-game. In contrast to this, after 1976 the institution of the penalty-duel is best described by a 3x3 game form constrained by certain behavioural rules. Those rules can be parameterized by a single parameter, which nevertheless allows the theoretical reproduction (and hence explanation) of all the empirically documented regularities.The scoring probability in equilibrium of the latter institution is higher than in the former one.We present historical evidence to the effect, that this change in the perception of penalty- duels (as two different games), was caused by Johan Neeskens' shrewd and 'revolutionary' penalty-taking during World-Cup 1974, when he shot a penalty in the first minute of the final between Germany and the Netherlands right into the middle of the goalmouth.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this ite
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Wolfgang Leininger & Axel Ockenfels, 2008. "The Penalty-Duel and Institutional Design: Is there a Neeskens-Effect?," CESifo Working Paper Series 2187, CESifo.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_2187
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp2187.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ritzberger, Klaus, 2002. "Foundations of Non-Cooperative Game Theory," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199247868.
    2. Moschini, GianCarlo, 2004. "Nash equilibrium in strictly competitive games: live play in soccer," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 365-371, December.
    3. Alvin E. Roth, 2002. "The Economist as Engineer: Game Theory, Experimentation, and Computation as Tools for Design Economics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(4), pages 1341-1378, July.
    4. Gary E Bolton & Jordi Brandts & Axel Ockenfels, 2005. "Fair Procedures: Evidence from Games Involving Lotteries," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 115(506), pages 1054-1076, October.
    5. Ignacio Palacios-Huerta, 2003. "Professionals Play Minimax," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 70(2), pages 395-415.
    6. Mark Walker & John Wooders, 2001. "Minimax Play at Wimbledon," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1521-1538, December.
    7. P.-A. Chiappori, 2002. "Testing Mixed-Strategy Equilibria When Players Are Heterogeneous: The Case of Penalty Kicks in Soccer," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1138-1151, September.
    8. Gary E. Bolton & Axel Ockenfels, 2006. "Inequality Aversion, Efficiency, and Maximin Preferences in Simple Distribution Experiments: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1906-1911, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kocher, Martin G. & Sutter, Matthias, 2010. "Introduction to special issue "The Economics and Psychology of Football"," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 155-157, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Luigi Buzzacchi & Stefano Pedrini, 2014. "Does player specialization predict player actions? Evidence from penalty kicks at FIFA World Cup and UEFA Euro Cup," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(10), pages 1067-1080, April.
    2. Giancarlo Moschini, 2010. "Incentives And Outcomes In A Strategic Setting: The 3‐Points‐For‐A‐Win System In Soccer," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(1), pages 65-79, January.
    3. Heiko Rauhut, 2009. "Higher Punishment, Less Control?," Rationality and Society, , vol. 21(3), pages 359-392, August.
    4. Marta Boczoń & Alistair J. Wilson, 2023. "Goals, Constraints, and Transparently Fair Assignments: A Field Study of Randomization Design in the UEFA Champions League," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(6), pages 3474-3491, June.
    5. Ofer Azar & Michael Bar-Eli, 2011. "Do soccer players play the mixed-strategy Nash equilibrium?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(25), pages 3591-3601.
    6. Emara, Noha & Owens, David & Smith, John & Wilmer, Lisa, 2017. "Serial correlation in National Football League play calling and its effects on outcomes," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 125-132.
    7. Massimiliano Landi & Domenico Colucci, 2005. "Rational and boundedly rational behavior in sender-receiver games," Working Papers 14-2006, Singapore Management University, School of Economics, revised May 2006.
    8. Daniele Condorelli & Massimiliano Furlan, 2024. "Deep Learning to Play Games," Papers 2409.15197, arXiv.org.
    9. Heifetz, Aviad & Heller, Ruth & Ostreiher, Roni, 2021. "Do Arabian babblers play mixed strategies in a “volunteer’s dilemma”?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    10. Spiliopoulos, Leonidas, 2012. "Pattern recognition and subjective belief learning in a repeated constant-sum game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 921-935.
    11. Jin-Hyuk Kim, 2013. "Does competition affect evolutionary dynamics? Evidence from a collegiate university," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(8), pages 781-785, May.
    12. Spiliopoulos, Leonidas, 2013. "Beyond fictitious play beliefs: Incorporating pattern recognition and similarity matching," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 69-85.
    13. Van Essen, Matt & Wooders, John, 2015. "Blind stealing: Experience and expertise in a mixed-strategy poker experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 186-206.
    14. Weinstein-Gould Jesse, 2009. "Keeping the Hitter Off Balance: Mixed Strategies in Baseball," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, May.
    15. Sean Duffy & J. J. Naddeo & David Owens & John Smith, 2024. "Cognitive Load and Mixed Strategies: On Brains and Minimax," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 26(03), pages 1-34, September.
    16. Alan Deck & Cary Deck & Zhen Zhu, 2014. "Decision Making in a Sequential Game," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 15(2), pages 132-149, April.
    17. Massimiliano Landi & Domenico Colucci, 2008. "Rational and Boundedly Rational Behavior in a Binary Choice Sender–Receiver Game," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 52(5), pages 665-686, October.
    18. Moschini, GianCarlo, 2004. "Nash equilibrium in strictly competitive games: live play in soccer," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 365-371, December.
    19. Okano, Yoshitaka, 2013. "Minimax play by teams," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 168-180.
    20. Florian Baumann & Tim Friehe & Michael Wedow, 2011. "General Ability and Specialization: Evidence From Penalty Kicks in Soccer," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 12(1), pages 81-105, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    soccer; game theory; sports;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C70 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - General
    • L83 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Sports; Gambling; Restaurants; Recreation; Tourism

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_2187. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.