What do you think?
Rate this book
The Hot Hand: The Mystery and Science of Streaks
A brilliant and buoyant investigation into the existence (or not) of streaks, from a rising star at the Wall Street Journal.
For decades, statisticians, social scientists, psychologists, and economists (among them Nobel Prize winners) have spent massive amounts of precious time thinking about whether streaks actually exist. After all, a substantial number of decisions that we make in our everyday lives are quietly rooted in this one question: If something happened before, will it happen again? Is there such a thing as being in the zone? Can someone have a “hot hand”? Or is it simply a case of seeing patterns in randomness? Or, if streaks are possible, where can they be found?
In The Hot Hand, Wall Street Journal reporter Ben Cohen offers an unfailingly entertaining and provocative investigation into these questions. He begins with how a $35,000 fine and a wild night in New York revived a debate about the existence of streaks that was several generations in the making. We learn how the ability to recognize and then bet against streaks turned a business school dropout named David Booth into a billionaire, and how the subconscious nature of streak-related bias can make the difference between life and death for asylum seekers. We see how previously unrecognized streaks hidden amidst archival data helped solve one of the most haunting mysteries of the twentieth century, the disappearance of Raoul Wallenberg. Cohen also exposes how streak-related incentives can be manipulated, from the five-syllable word that helped break arcade profit records to an arc of black paint that allowed Stephen Curry to transform from future junior high coach into the greatest three-point shooter in NBA history. Crucially, Cohen also explores why false recognition of nonexistent streaks can have cataclysmic results, particularly if you are a sugar beet farmer or the sort of gambler who likes to switch to black on the ninth spin of the roulette wheel.
A brilliant investigation into when streaks exist and how they can be taken advantage of, The Hot Hand is essential reading for anyone who thinks they’ve got a shot.
For decades, statisticians, social scientists, psychologists, and economists (among them Nobel Prize winners) have spent massive amounts of precious time thinking about whether streaks actually exist. After all, a substantial number of decisions that we make in our everyday lives are quietly rooted in this one question: If something happened before, will it happen again? Is there such a thing as being in the zone? Can someone have a “hot hand”? Or is it simply a case of seeing patterns in randomness? Or, if streaks are possible, where can they be found?
In The Hot Hand, Wall Street Journal reporter Ben Cohen offers an unfailingly entertaining and provocative investigation into these questions. He begins with how a $35,000 fine and a wild night in New York revived a debate about the existence of streaks that was several generations in the making. We learn how the ability to recognize and then bet against streaks turned a business school dropout named David Booth into a billionaire, and how the subconscious nature of streak-related bias can make the difference between life and death for asylum seekers. We see how previously unrecognized streaks hidden amidst archival data helped solve one of the most haunting mysteries of the twentieth century, the disappearance of Raoul Wallenberg. Cohen also exposes how streak-related incentives can be manipulated, from the five-syllable word that helped break arcade profit records to an arc of black paint that allowed Stephen Curry to transform from future junior high coach into the greatest three-point shooter in NBA history. Crucially, Cohen also explores why false recognition of nonexistent streaks can have cataclysmic results, particularly if you are a sugar beet farmer or the sort of gambler who likes to switch to black on the ninth spin of the roulette wheel.
A brilliant investigation into when streaks exist and how they can be taken advantage of, The Hot Hand is essential reading for anyone who thinks they’ve got a shot.
304 pages, Hardcover
First published March 10, 2020
232 people are currently reading
3334 people want to read
About the author
Ben Cohen
3 books15 followersThere is more than one Ben Cohen in the GR database. This is Ben^^Cohen.
Ben Cohen is a sports reporter for The Wall Street Journal. He writes about the NBA, the Olympics and other topics that don't involve extraordinarily athletic people. He lives in New York with his wife and their cat. The Hot Hand is his first book.
(source: Amazon)
Ben Cohen is a sports reporter for The Wall Street Journal. He writes about the NBA, the Olympics and other topics that don't involve extraordinarily athletic people. He lives in New York with his wife and their cat. The Hot Hand is his first book.
(source: Amazon)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 128 reviews
April 5, 2020
Ben Cohen’s The Hot Hand taught me a lot, not all of it about the “The Mystery and Science of Streaks.” Here’s what I learned.
A story written to entertain is not the same as a story written to persuade. The Hot Hand is full of interesting stories, most well told about a variety of fascinating people from many walks of life. The stories entertain, but some have nothing to do with the hot hand; some are so detailed, the relationship to the hot hand is lost, and some relate to the hot hand with only tangential connections. In this book, Cohen is trying to persuade, make an argument. He does do that, but his argument is lost among a broad collection of often irrelevant stories.
Beware of the author who alternates back and forth (and back and forth) among several story lines. This intercutting technique can work if the various narratives ultimately weave a coherent whole, a fabric that fits together. However, The Hot Hand's stop-and-start narrative seems designed to withhold information merely as a tease. As a result, the structure left me frustrated, not begging for more.
A clearly articulated premise or definition yields a focused argument and a focused book. After providing some useful insights into the hot hand, Cohen says (pp. 2-3), “But there doesn’t have to be a singular definition of the hot hand. You can simply tell when players are hot when you see them ablaze.” Though this definition is vague, at least it implies a streak is involved. When you see perhaps a basketball player “ablaze,” that suggests a series of successful shots.
However, Cohen often discusses the likelihood of making shot two after shot one; certainly not a streak. There’s also an extensive analysis on three-shot sequences (actually coin flips) to prove a math fallacy. These sections, on sequences of two or three, hardly seem like a streak where someone is “ablaze.” To summarize, the book provides a lot of math on the subsets of streaks, math that somehow seems separate from the mystery of something lengthy.
Cohen’s open-ended definition leads to a wide range of examples. He describes Shakespeare’s hot hand during a prolific period… Rebecca Clarke’s inability to have a hot streak with her sonatas due to discrimination against women at the time…a farmer’s bumper crop…an auction for the rules of basketball… and the gambler’s fallacy. After all, Cohen says (p.2), “The hot hand exists in nearly every industry and touches nearly every person on earth.” My response: Intriguing idea, but it's so much of a stretch, it leads to loss of focus.
So I learned a lot from The Hot Hand, and I feel better informed from reading the book. That said, many of the lessons were about writing nonfiction, not about the topic. Actually, there is a contradiction here. Cohen has done extensive, thoughtful research. His work is carefully supported with “An Author’s Note on Sources,” extensive endnotes, and a 15-page bibliography. The Hot Hand is a thorough piece of writing. Unfortunately, the end result doesn’t reflect the effort. To conclude with a petty comment, The Hot Hand left me cold.
A story written to entertain is not the same as a story written to persuade. The Hot Hand is full of interesting stories, most well told about a variety of fascinating people from many walks of life. The stories entertain, but some have nothing to do with the hot hand; some are so detailed, the relationship to the hot hand is lost, and some relate to the hot hand with only tangential connections. In this book, Cohen is trying to persuade, make an argument. He does do that, but his argument is lost among a broad collection of often irrelevant stories.
Beware of the author who alternates back and forth (and back and forth) among several story lines. This intercutting technique can work if the various narratives ultimately weave a coherent whole, a fabric that fits together. However, The Hot Hand's stop-and-start narrative seems designed to withhold information merely as a tease. As a result, the structure left me frustrated, not begging for more.
A clearly articulated premise or definition yields a focused argument and a focused book. After providing some useful insights into the hot hand, Cohen says (pp. 2-3), “But there doesn’t have to be a singular definition of the hot hand. You can simply tell when players are hot when you see them ablaze.” Though this definition is vague, at least it implies a streak is involved. When you see perhaps a basketball player “ablaze,” that suggests a series of successful shots.
However, Cohen often discusses the likelihood of making shot two after shot one; certainly not a streak. There’s also an extensive analysis on three-shot sequences (actually coin flips) to prove a math fallacy. These sections, on sequences of two or three, hardly seem like a streak where someone is “ablaze.” To summarize, the book provides a lot of math on the subsets of streaks, math that somehow seems separate from the mystery of something lengthy.
Cohen’s open-ended definition leads to a wide range of examples. He describes Shakespeare’s hot hand during a prolific period… Rebecca Clarke’s inability to have a hot streak with her sonatas due to discrimination against women at the time…a farmer’s bumper crop…an auction for the rules of basketball… and the gambler’s fallacy. After all, Cohen says (p.2), “The hot hand exists in nearly every industry and touches nearly every person on earth.” My response: Intriguing idea, but it's so much of a stretch, it leads to loss of focus.
So I learned a lot from The Hot Hand, and I feel better informed from reading the book. That said, many of the lessons were about writing nonfiction, not about the topic. Actually, there is a contradiction here. Cohen has done extensive, thoughtful research. His work is carefully supported with “An Author’s Note on Sources,” extensive endnotes, and a 15-page bibliography. The Hot Hand is a thorough piece of writing. Unfortunately, the end result doesn’t reflect the effort. To conclude with a petty comment, The Hot Hand left me cold.
August 14, 2020
There’s been a lot of debate about whether the hot-hand exists (e.g. basketball players are statistically more likely to hit shots as they shoot and make shots in a row without missing). This book, like most in the pop-science genre, could have been 90% shorter. But it is an interesting story and for people interested in biases, statistics, and performance, it’s probably worth a quick read. Borrow it from the library. Not worth spending money on it.
One key insight. Streaks likely exist in certain situations and you should lean into them when you experience them.
One key insight. Streaks likely exist in certain situations and you should lean into them when you experience them.
February 2, 2024
At some point down the line I will have a list of my favorite books that I have had the pleasure of reading. This won’t be one of them. There are some interesting ideas in here, however, none that I feel the need to post on Goodreads.
October 21, 2020
Felt like this book was written for me. Thinking Fast and Slow meets Moneyball. Plus mix in gulags, Shakespeare, Van Gogh, NBA Jam, and much more.
Ben Cohen manages to weave a plethora of stories into one coherent narrative and supremely entertaining book. Recommend if you have any interest in data analytics, phycology, sports, or history. Enjoy!
Ben Cohen manages to weave a plethora of stories into one coherent narrative and supremely entertaining book. Recommend if you have any interest in data analytics, phycology, sports, or history. Enjoy!
July 12, 2020
Good storytelling, but he meanders too much off topic with diverse off-topic segments like Raoul Wallenberg and Van Gogh that don't really relate to the Hot Hand.
March 10, 2021
An author desperately in need of a strong editor.
He has generally interesting stories about people and events that he implies he will tie together to support the exposure/support of a "hot hand" but he never does. This is two books: 1) a bunch of interesting short stories/essays and 2) the background of the research done to prove that a hot hand (particularly in sports or gambling) does not exist and the background of the research done to prove that a hot hand does exist. I consider the small forays into academia and how folks respond to upturning of canon to be a legitimate part of the 2nd book.
So, the book is good if you go into knowing that it is really two unrelated books. His explanation of the math behind the exposé of the does-not-exist error was well written and understandable by anyone who got past algebra 1 (no stats knowledge really needed).
He has generally interesting stories about people and events that he implies he will tie together to support the exposure/support of a "hot hand" but he never does. This is two books: 1) a bunch of interesting short stories/essays and 2) the background of the research done to prove that a hot hand (particularly in sports or gambling) does not exist and the background of the research done to prove that a hot hand does exist. I consider the small forays into academia and how folks respond to upturning of canon to be a legitimate part of the 2nd book.
So, the book is good if you go into knowing that it is really two unrelated books. His explanation of the math behind the exposé of the does-not-exist error was well written and understandable by anyone who got past algebra 1 (no stats knowledge really needed).
April 12, 2021
I started out loving this book, then hating it, and finally yanking the audio cd out of my car's player in disgust. I was fascinated to learn about the hot hand and statistical streaks. And it started out that way, kinda. But then it just devolved into one story after another - entire biographies of basketball players, genius video game designers, Silicon Valley giants, Iraqi refugees, the judges who decide asylum applications, heroes saving Hungarian Jews in WWII, university professors, and kids inventing genius in their parents' basements. It reminded me of the guy who just won't shut up, vomiting out story after story, in which each character's entire back story must be fully explained before continuing on to avoid the point altogether.
Do yourself a favor - run, don't walk, away from this one.
Do yourself a favor - run, don't walk, away from this one.
March 24, 2020
Is there truth or science behind a “running streak” of good luck, talent, winning or creativity? I love the genre that tackles issues or questions combining human psychology, data, trends and storytelling. Cohen’s WSJ reporter background means he takes a compelling detective’s journey using disparate case studies. The book’s chapters range from a Russian prison to Steph Curry on the Warrior’s basketball court, Wall Street and the Amazon jungle, to name just a few. The outcome? Streaks, formerly debunked by scholars and mathematicians both can and can’t be cultivated. Fans of Michael Lewis and Malcolm Gladwell will devour this one
October 30, 2024
This is a nice, compact exploration of how momentum in sports can be a real phenomenon that seems to break traditional regression to the mean expectations. It provides some more detailed insights into how basketball is being "moneyballed" too. Although today, we need more thoughtful writing about how optimization strategies in professional sports have increasingly made them less compelling and how rule changes can be applied to improve viewability.
This book could have of course been distilled even further down to an essay, but it was such a quick read that it's hard to fault too much for any fluff.
This book could have of course been distilled even further down to an essay, but it was such a quick read that it's hard to fault too much for any fluff.
May 17, 2024
This book is great. It combines sports, art, and math in an incredible history lesson. Easy to read and hard to put down.
December 15, 2020
Audible from the library that I really enjoyed. If you are a sports fan. Specifically basketball sports fan you will enjoy. Book written by talented wash post Ben Cohen. Concept of the book is the hot hand real ? Many many studies in the bast have proven the hot hand is not real and through sports Ben gets us to maybe consider otherwise. When your show people randomness often people don’t believe.
People see patterns where there are none
How he uses the warriors and steph curry and bob Myers I loved these parts of the book. I have been in enough gyms, watched enough basketball, played in enough pick up games to know and believe that the hot hand is a thing ....why is that ?
This book gets you thinking. Confidence, circumstances. Environment. In basketball the importance of the passer. Lots of stories woven through. I didn’t fully understand the whole art - van gough stories and how they connected. But aside from that. Very enjoyable. For all my sports loving friends who are looking. For a book to listen with your spouse. This could be it.
People see patterns where there are none
How he uses the warriors and steph curry and bob Myers I loved these parts of the book. I have been in enough gyms, watched enough basketball, played in enough pick up games to know and believe that the hot hand is a thing ....why is that ?
This book gets you thinking. Confidence, circumstances. Environment. In basketball the importance of the passer. Lots of stories woven through. I didn’t fully understand the whole art - van gough stories and how they connected. But aside from that. Very enjoyable. For all my sports loving friends who are looking. For a book to listen with your spouse. This could be it.
July 26, 2023
Perhaps my expectation was incorrect in starting this book - but after failing to square a definition for what a ‘Hot Hand’ actually is, the author attempts to compare Steph Curry hitting 3 shots in a single basketball game to the careers of artists like Shakespeare and Van Gogh spread across 200 pages of lovely little stories that… fail to make a point.
We were so off topic by the final third I found myself wondering what I was reading and decided I’d had enough.
We were so off topic by the final third I found myself wondering what I was reading and decided I’d had enough.
September 6, 2020
Watch a detailed review along with my favorite ideas and takeaways at:
https://youtu.be/TE7cbwMohPg
https://youtu.be/TE7cbwMohPg
July 4, 2020
I enjoyed reading this book (it is a breezy read) but I am still not sure what it was about. It is very loosely organized around some new ideas about probability and performance, namely that hot streaks may actually exist.
But the subject matter is SO diverse (Steph Curry, Van Gogh forgeries, hedge fund performance, Shakespeare and the plague) and the arguments are so general that I can not recall any point that Cohen truly made. I found each anecdote to be interesting--Cohen is a good writer and he has collected some great stories--but I found the book to be devoid of answers as to why any of the anecdotes were important, much less what brought them all together in this curious book.
It may be the case that the ideal reader of this book is someone much smarter than I am who can figure out the patterns and conclusions that Cohen merely hints at. But I cannot remember being as disappointed at reaching the conclusion of a book as I was with this one. "Is that it??"
But the subject matter is SO diverse (Steph Curry, Van Gogh forgeries, hedge fund performance, Shakespeare and the plague) and the arguments are so general that I can not recall any point that Cohen truly made. I found each anecdote to be interesting--Cohen is a good writer and he has collected some great stories--but I found the book to be devoid of answers as to why any of the anecdotes were important, much less what brought them all together in this curious book.
It may be the case that the ideal reader of this book is someone much smarter than I am who can figure out the patterns and conclusions that Cohen merely hints at. But I cannot remember being as disappointed at reaching the conclusion of a book as I was with this one. "Is that it??"
April 11, 2020
This book was fascinating if a bit long. I really enjoyed books like Freakanomics and The World is Flat and this book feels like it's in those veins. There were a couple anecdotes that went in directions where it was easy to lose the original p0int of the book and served more as distraction than proof. I also felt a bit of whiplash with whether or not streaks are real. There is a lot of detailed information about basketball, but even if you don't enjoy sports history, there are enough other fields and stories pulled in to keep you interested in the subject at hand (prisoner of war, plague and Shakespeare, beet farming, etc). Was able to read an advanced reader from work and it was fun to be able to recommend the book when it was released to the public. Give this book a shot and come to your own conclusions about the existence of streaks and the hot hand.
September 20, 2020
The hot hand is a game warping effect in sports. If you have the hot hand, you can do anything you want. If you're on the same team as the hot hand, you just gotta feed them. If you're on the other side, you're screwed. Such a game warping situation can not be planned for, should not be relied on, but when you have it, should be ridden as far as it can go. But is it real? Athletes and coaches know it is. Mathematicians and economists proved in 1982 that it did not. In the years after Moneyball, can we we afford to believe in the Hot Hand? How does the Hot Hand effect warp decision making in other fields?
This is a book about "the Hot Hand" and it's evolution in proofs. Ben Cohen knows when math is important, but he does revel in it. He's not writting the next Moneyball, but I think this book is a strong outline of the question proposed and how the thinking on it has changed with new approaches. How the math affects the outcome is broadly stated. Specifics are less important (with one major exception which I think he handled the proof very well). Most of it is rooted in basketball, but it's important to note that he discusses the effects of the "hot hand" in other cases. He defines when "hot hand" effect is an illusion (when you have no real control of the outcome) and discusses what is needed to capitalize on a "hot hand" effect even if it's not real.
One major note: Ben Cohen is a sports reporter. He's a newspaper man. This defines how this books should be approached. He is a man who believes stories, and loves to tell them. This book is entertaining and easy to read (hell, I did it in one day and I NEVER do that), filled with short entertaining and interconnected stories. It is also a little dramatic. Ben can tell a tight story, but he relies on manufactured tension to ensure you keep reading. Near the end of the day, I felt my attention span was being held hostage. If I dropped the narrative I'm not sure I would be able to pick it up again. The tension would be gone, and I would be lost. That's not exactly what I was looking for in a book about a statistical anomaly. I don't think this is "bad," but I do think near the end he used it irresponsibly. There was a story he wanted to tell, and it feels like he forced it into the middle of a more relevant though dryer story. Though both stories were well written, I had internal tonal shifts ("Why am I reading this? What does this have to do with what we just talked about?") when he would bounce between them. This bounce between stories style occurs fairly commonly throughout the book, but this one instance is in my opinion a mistake.
I don't know why, but right now I'm really into Basketball. This book scratched all of my itches. Oh man, did I enjoy reading this book. Filled with great stories combining the use of mathematical models and basketball, who could ask for more. If you do not like basketball, I don't think you'll love this book like I did. You may learn a bit. You may like it, but this is for people who like basketball.
This is a book about "the Hot Hand" and it's evolution in proofs. Ben Cohen knows when math is important, but he does revel in it. He's not writting the next Moneyball, but I think this book is a strong outline of the question proposed and how the thinking on it has changed with new approaches. How the math affects the outcome is broadly stated. Specifics are less important (with one major exception which I think he handled the proof very well). Most of it is rooted in basketball, but it's important to note that he discusses the effects of the "hot hand" in other cases. He defines when "hot hand" effect is an illusion (when you have no real control of the outcome) and discusses what is needed to capitalize on a "hot hand" effect even if it's not real.
One major note: Ben Cohen is a sports reporter. He's a newspaper man. This defines how this books should be approached. He is a man who believes stories, and loves to tell them. This book is entertaining and easy to read (hell, I did it in one day and I NEVER do that), filled with short entertaining and interconnected stories. It is also a little dramatic. Ben can tell a tight story, but he relies on manufactured tension to ensure you keep reading. Near the end of the day, I felt my attention span was being held hostage. If I dropped the narrative I'm not sure I would be able to pick it up again. The tension would be gone, and I would be lost. That's not exactly what I was looking for in a book about a statistical anomaly. I don't think this is "bad," but I do think near the end he used it irresponsibly. There was a story he wanted to tell, and it feels like he forced it into the middle of a more relevant though dryer story. Though both stories were well written, I had internal tonal shifts ("Why am I reading this? What does this have to do with what we just talked about?") when he would bounce between them. This bounce between stories style occurs fairly commonly throughout the book, but this one instance is in my opinion a mistake.
I don't know why, but right now I'm really into Basketball. This book scratched all of my itches. Oh man, did I enjoy reading this book. Filled with great stories combining the use of mathematical models and basketball, who could ask for more. If you do not like basketball, I don't think you'll love this book like I did. You may learn a bit. You may like it, but this is for people who like basketball.
November 30, 2020
Many basketball players, coaches, and fans feel that a shooter who has made several shots in a row is "hot" and will therefore make more shots in the future than would otherwise be expected. The outcome of one coin flip implies nothing about the next flip, but, according to the hot-hand theory, a sequence of successful shots does imply that subsequent shots are more likely to be successful.
In 1985, no less an authority than Amos Tversky (along with two co-authors) produced a paper debunking the hot-hand theory; the data in the paper said that the theory was unsupported by data. Studies of other sports (soccer, hockey, etc.) confirmed the finding; no evidence of the hot hand could be found. Despite the fervent objections of athletes and coaches, those in academia began referring dismissively to the "hot hand fallacy." The story would be just another instance of a persistent cognitive bias were it not for the fact that some 30 years later, two researchers realized that the claims of fallacy relied on an incorrect mathematical assumption. And, so, there is now evidence that the hot hand is real.
As someone who believed (erroneously) that the hot hand had been disproven, I was surprised (and delighted) to find that subsequent research showed that what players knew was right all along: sometimes a good shooter is "in the zone." The story, then, reflects something akin to what
Nassim Nicholas Taleb refers to as "lecturing birds on how to fly." Academics have an unfortunate tendency to treat mere practitioners with disdain.
Cohen tells this story with detours through Silicon Valley, farming, financial management, immigration courts, and even Shakespeare. Some of these sidelights are more relevant to the core narrative than others, but all are interesting. Cohen jumps from topic to topic like a novelist interleaving storylines. The format is engaging but sometimes makes it hard not to lose the plot. Sadly, Cohen fails to fully explain the critical mathematical insight that debunked the original debunking, but most readers probably will not mind. The writing is breezy and enjoyable, but like a tour of fourteen cities in just nine days, Cohen sometimes left me feeling I had missed more than I saw. But, minor faults aside, those who enjoy sports, and particularly sports statistics, will find the book both fun and educational.
In 1985, no less an authority than Amos Tversky (along with two co-authors) produced a paper debunking the hot-hand theory; the data in the paper said that the theory was unsupported by data. Studies of other sports (soccer, hockey, etc.) confirmed the finding; no evidence of the hot hand could be found. Despite the fervent objections of athletes and coaches, those in academia began referring dismissively to the "hot hand fallacy." The story would be just another instance of a persistent cognitive bias were it not for the fact that some 30 years later, two researchers realized that the claims of fallacy relied on an incorrect mathematical assumption. And, so, there is now evidence that the hot hand is real.
As someone who believed (erroneously) that the hot hand had been disproven, I was surprised (and delighted) to find that subsequent research showed that what players knew was right all along: sometimes a good shooter is "in the zone." The story, then, reflects something akin to what
Nassim Nicholas Taleb refers to as "lecturing birds on how to fly." Academics have an unfortunate tendency to treat mere practitioners with disdain.
Cohen tells this story with detours through Silicon Valley, farming, financial management, immigration courts, and even Shakespeare. Some of these sidelights are more relevant to the core narrative than others, but all are interesting. Cohen jumps from topic to topic like a novelist interleaving storylines. The format is engaging but sometimes makes it hard not to lose the plot. Sadly, Cohen fails to fully explain the critical mathematical insight that debunked the original debunking, but most readers probably will not mind. The writing is breezy and enjoyable, but like a tour of fourteen cities in just nine days, Cohen sometimes left me feeling I had missed more than I saw. But, minor faults aside, those who enjoy sports, and particularly sports statistics, will find the book both fun and educational.
January 14, 2021
Entertaining but flawed. This book purports to tell the story of the hot hand, exemplified as a streaky shooter in basketball. Academics have long held that there is no such thing as the hot hand, rather our minds have a problem as interpretting randomness as patterned. But several people have continuted to research basketball and the hot hand fallacy, and armed with new data (big data), they attempt to change peoples minds.
In telling this story, the author dives into apsects of Behavioral Economics, big data, and sports analytics. It would make for a decent update to Michael Lewis's Moneyball (but not a replacement) or a companion to Michael Lewis's The Undoing Project. Indeed, Cohen is a fan of Michael Lewis, but his book doesn't achieve the master of the two mentioned.
The book suffers from what many of these accessible science books do in that their primary story gets condensed in order to keep the subject matter simple. Too simple in some instances (his explanation of the findings of a technical paper important to the book forced me to find the paper online to fill in the missing pieces). So other topics are pulled into the fray to pad the book, chapters like magazie articles revolving around a central subject.
So instead of just basketball and the hot hand, we get discussions of the productivce periods of Shakespeare and Van Gogh (which were ridiculously identified as hot hand periods so that they seemed relevent), the Visa troubles of an Iraqi artist (to teach us about randomness) and a great story about using big data to uncover the whereabouts of a Swedish man who saved thousands of Jewish lives during World War II only to be imprisioned and forgotten by the Russians. Oh yeah, and a story about the creater of the game NBA Jam because of the unforgettable "He's on Fire" catch-phrase.
All entertaining, unnecessary stuff that takes away from the hot hand plot. And then theres the classic twisting of events to make for a better story. For instance a blog post on the Hot Hand that the author claims was full on scathing internet criticisms only has 118 comments, most of them very academic, thoughtful, and hospitable. And Cohen gives the Golden State Warriors credit for introducing the "only 3s and layouts" strategy to the NBA, when the Rockets popularized this (as was mentioned in the Michael Lewis The Undoing Project book).
Its a fine book but was hoping for a bit more.
In telling this story, the author dives into apsects of Behavioral Economics, big data, and sports analytics. It would make for a decent update to Michael Lewis's Moneyball (but not a replacement) or a companion to Michael Lewis's The Undoing Project. Indeed, Cohen is a fan of Michael Lewis, but his book doesn't achieve the master of the two mentioned.
The book suffers from what many of these accessible science books do in that their primary story gets condensed in order to keep the subject matter simple. Too simple in some instances (his explanation of the findings of a technical paper important to the book forced me to find the paper online to fill in the missing pieces). So other topics are pulled into the fray to pad the book, chapters like magazie articles revolving around a central subject.
So instead of just basketball and the hot hand, we get discussions of the productivce periods of Shakespeare and Van Gogh (which were ridiculously identified as hot hand periods so that they seemed relevent), the Visa troubles of an Iraqi artist (to teach us about randomness) and a great story about using big data to uncover the whereabouts of a Swedish man who saved thousands of Jewish lives during World War II only to be imprisioned and forgotten by the Russians. Oh yeah, and a story about the creater of the game NBA Jam because of the unforgettable "He's on Fire" catch-phrase.
All entertaining, unnecessary stuff that takes away from the hot hand plot. And then theres the classic twisting of events to make for a better story. For instance a blog post on the Hot Hand that the author claims was full on scathing internet criticisms only has 118 comments, most of them very academic, thoughtful, and hospitable. And Cohen gives the Golden State Warriors credit for introducing the "only 3s and layouts" strategy to the NBA, when the Rockets popularized this (as was mentioned in the Michael Lewis The Undoing Project book).
Its a fine book but was hoping for a bit more.
May 5, 2022
3 stars firm
This is a pretty entertaining book. It is full of ideas, some of them mathematical, and it’s also full of enthusiasm for its subject. Cohen comes across as a young person who just can’t wait to tell you about the latest article on art forgery (or farming or roulette or margarine manufacturers) he’s read or to describe the great basketball game he just saw.
The hero and main character here is Steph Curry. Cohen circles back again and again to the question of whether or not Curry (and other performers of varied tasks) actually have streaks of exceptional play (or exceptional practice) in their chosen careers. Apparently there have been (and perhaps continue to be) statisticians who claim not only that there are no such things as streaks of luck in random events such as gambling, but also that there are no streaks of “hot play” in human decision making and athletic performance. This latter claim would seem (to me) to deny that on some days people are good at their jobs and on other days they are not. Or is the claim merely that our goodness and badness at our jobs even out over the long duree? If this is the case, then do people ever get better at a task? That is to say, does their average of good practice transcend what they have historically been doing and does it plateau at a higher level? I’m a bit confused, even after reading the book what exactly the anti-streakers are actually claiming.
Anyhow, Cohen goes into these matters in intelligent detail. However, he also goes into other questions that seem to have less relevance. For example, in what Soviet cell was Raoul Wallenberg, the Swedish diplomat and spy incarcerated and for how long was he there? Is there anything a beet farmer can do to mitigate the effects of bad weather? Did Shakespeare write his plays two a year regular as clockwork for the duration of his creative career? Cohen claims that these questions bear on the question of “the hot hand,” but their relevance is not readily apparent, at least to this reader.
I did not much care for the style of this book. A gee-whiz, kind of breathless tone persists throughout, and Cohen is prone to cringe inducing similes. He also redundantly hammers home points that are not especially difficult to follow.
All in all, this book displays curiosity about lots of subjects and is informative about most of them. I liked reading it, and, despite, criticisms above would read another book by Cohen.
This is a pretty entertaining book. It is full of ideas, some of them mathematical, and it’s also full of enthusiasm for its subject. Cohen comes across as a young person who just can’t wait to tell you about the latest article on art forgery (or farming or roulette or margarine manufacturers) he’s read or to describe the great basketball game he just saw.
The hero and main character here is Steph Curry. Cohen circles back again and again to the question of whether or not Curry (and other performers of varied tasks) actually have streaks of exceptional play (or exceptional practice) in their chosen careers. Apparently there have been (and perhaps continue to be) statisticians who claim not only that there are no such things as streaks of luck in random events such as gambling, but also that there are no streaks of “hot play” in human decision making and athletic performance. This latter claim would seem (to me) to deny that on some days people are good at their jobs and on other days they are not. Or is the claim merely that our goodness and badness at our jobs even out over the long duree? If this is the case, then do people ever get better at a task? That is to say, does their average of good practice transcend what they have historically been doing and does it plateau at a higher level? I’m a bit confused, even after reading the book what exactly the anti-streakers are actually claiming.
Anyhow, Cohen goes into these matters in intelligent detail. However, he also goes into other questions that seem to have less relevance. For example, in what Soviet cell was Raoul Wallenberg, the Swedish diplomat and spy incarcerated and for how long was he there? Is there anything a beet farmer can do to mitigate the effects of bad weather? Did Shakespeare write his plays two a year regular as clockwork for the duration of his creative career? Cohen claims that these questions bear on the question of “the hot hand,” but their relevance is not readily apparent, at least to this reader.
I did not much care for the style of this book. A gee-whiz, kind of breathless tone persists throughout, and Cohen is prone to cringe inducing similes. He also redundantly hammers home points that are not especially difficult to follow.
All in all, this book displays curiosity about lots of subjects and is informative about most of them. I liked reading it, and, despite, criticisms above would read another book by Cohen.
May 27, 2020
Summary: I would recommend this for two reasons. 1. It's very well written (the author has some serious writing chops). 2. As far as I know there aren't really any other books that cover this subject extensively like this one does. But at the end of the day this book needed more focus and overall this work contains some notable flaws.
Pros:
1. The book really dives into data/evidence collected on streaks. It also provides anecdotal evidence through big time names like Steph curry and Shakespeare to showcase instances where the "hot hand" presented itself and what caused it to present itself.
2. The author is an amazing writer and showcases a talent for being able to break down sports, but also break down history, farming, poetry, and economics. Even though this book is a 3/5 for me...the author is a 4/5 talent in terms of his "writing chops" I hope he creates another book sometime in the future.
3. The author does a good job of connecting people from each example to other examples. For example a group of researchers who manifest a theory on the hot hand end up running into a prominent researcher mentioned extensively earlier in the book. The author also does a good job of showing a common denominator in a love for basketball among the various people featured in the. Book
Cons:
1. The last half of the book or so focuses more so on the various stories/examples then it does the hot hand itself. We learn more about Al-Saffar, Toby Moskowitz, and Carolyn Stein then then we do about "the hot hand". Which is odd cause the first half is spot on in regards to staying on topic and getting to the point. Again I enjoyed each and every person that the book focused on because Ben Cohen managed to obtain so much information on each person, and has very impressive "writing chops". But at the end of the day I read this to learn about "the hot hand" not Raoul Wallenberg's brave exploits in Europe.
2. The transitions are bad... like the author jumps from example to example... which is fine but it does it in a rough way, or the author decides to shift to another example at an odd moment, a moment that isn't meant to be a "pause moment".
Pros:
1. The book really dives into data/evidence collected on streaks. It also provides anecdotal evidence through big time names like Steph curry and Shakespeare to showcase instances where the "hot hand" presented itself and what caused it to present itself.
2. The author is an amazing writer and showcases a talent for being able to break down sports, but also break down history, farming, poetry, and economics. Even though this book is a 3/5 for me...the author is a 4/5 talent in terms of his "writing chops" I hope he creates another book sometime in the future.
3. The author does a good job of connecting people from each example to other examples. For example a group of researchers who manifest a theory on the hot hand end up running into a prominent researcher mentioned extensively earlier in the book. The author also does a good job of showing a common denominator in a love for basketball among the various people featured in the. Book
Cons:
1. The last half of the book or so focuses more so on the various stories/examples then it does the hot hand itself. We learn more about Al-Saffar, Toby Moskowitz, and Carolyn Stein then then we do about "the hot hand". Which is odd cause the first half is spot on in regards to staying on topic and getting to the point. Again I enjoyed each and every person that the book focused on because Ben Cohen managed to obtain so much information on each person, and has very impressive "writing chops". But at the end of the day I read this to learn about "the hot hand" not Raoul Wallenberg's brave exploits in Europe.
2. The transitions are bad... like the author jumps from example to example... which is fine but it does it in a rough way, or the author decides to shift to another example at an odd moment, a moment that isn't meant to be a "pause moment".
January 17, 2023
I did not care about the hot hand before picking up this book. In fact, based on the title, I thought it would be about gambling and statistics. To be fair, it was a little bit, but the core premise focuses on the "hot hand" in basketball, which as a new sports watcher I hadn't even heard of before.
Before reading this book I would have assumed it was obvious that, sometimes, a player plays better than usual. Making several shots in a row is an indication that they are on top of their game, and you can expect them to continue making shots at a higher rate. I would have been easily convinced that this could be explained by statistics alone, too. I would have looked at you like you had 3 heads if you told me this has been a hotly debated topic in statistics for over 50 years.
I very much enjoyed the narrative in this book, even if some of it had a tenuous link to the hot hand story. The non-linear style did its job of keeping me intrigued throughout. I read and enjoyed Thinking, Fast and Slow and was proud of myself for guessing Tversky and Kahneman would be the pair of famous psychologists mentioned early on. I think all of the stories served the narrative well despite the fact that some were less relevant than others.
I'm still not sure that I care about the hot hand. It almost seems like people are talking past each other about the whole thing. Denying that players are able to go on hot streaks because they're playing better than usual seems ridiculous - almost as ridiculous as arguing that the act of making a few shots in a row alone puts you into a mental state that makes it impossible to miss. Which one is meant when people talk about it? Both? Neither? Am I supposed to care? If anything the book seems to imply that there isn't a consistent definition of it. I find it hard to believe, then, that academics have debated it as presented in the book. Surely they would have defined it more clearly. But I'm just going to take it at face value, I guess. The hot hand is, definitively... well, you'll have to read the book to find out.
Before reading this book I would have assumed it was obvious that, sometimes, a player plays better than usual. Making several shots in a row is an indication that they are on top of their game, and you can expect them to continue making shots at a higher rate. I would have been easily convinced that this could be explained by statistics alone, too. I would have looked at you like you had 3 heads if you told me this has been a hotly debated topic in statistics for over 50 years.
I very much enjoyed the narrative in this book, even if some of it had a tenuous link to the hot hand story. The non-linear style did its job of keeping me intrigued throughout. I read and enjoyed Thinking, Fast and Slow and was proud of myself for guessing Tversky and Kahneman would be the pair of famous psychologists mentioned early on. I think all of the stories served the narrative well despite the fact that some were less relevant than others.
I'm still not sure that I care about the hot hand. It almost seems like people are talking past each other about the whole thing. Denying that players are able to go on hot streaks because they're playing better than usual seems ridiculous - almost as ridiculous as arguing that the act of making a few shots in a row alone puts you into a mental state that makes it impossible to miss. Which one is meant when people talk about it? Both? Neither? Am I supposed to care? If anything the book seems to imply that there isn't a consistent definition of it. I find it hard to believe, then, that academics have debated it as presented in the book. Surely they would have defined it more clearly. But I'm just going to take it at face value, I guess. The hot hand is, definitively... well, you'll have to read the book to find out.
July 10, 2020
This book is well-researched. Its characters are interesting and vivid. Their data on the hot hand is compelling. Of course, as a non fiction book, all Ben Cohen can take credit for in these compliments is that he took the time to compile this information.
Is it well-organized? No; the book jumps from story to story, lamely trying to build suspense, rather than build an argument. The book ends essentially with “maybe it exists. Maybe sometimes it doesn’t. It really depends on a lot of things. The debate will rage on, and isn’t that the best part?” This makes the entire discussion formless.
Is it a good sports book? No— the majority of conversation is about other things, including Iranian artists, Swedish heroes, sugar beet farmers, and Shakespeare. Cohen says this is because the hot hand occurs across almost every discipline but come on; it’s obvious he could not find enough material in sports to fill the book. He drops his sports protagonist, Steph Curry, in chapter one and picks him back up again in the epilogue.
Is it well-written? F*ck no! If not for the content of the book, its writing is one-star, amateur-level. I highlighted this sentence in particular: “Miller didn’t appear nervous even when his insides were doing the Electric Slide.” “There was one passage in [Moneyball] about finance ... that might as well have been their erotica.” It’s written in such a salacious and stupid way.
This book was written on the shoulders of Moneyball for sure, but Moneyball is the superior read by leagues. It’s a better sports book; it’s a better analysis of data and human behavior; it’s a better narrative, written by a better author. The best portion of Cohen’s book were the sections he quoted Moneyball, which is to say, just read Moneyball.
Is it well-organized? No; the book jumps from story to story, lamely trying to build suspense, rather than build an argument. The book ends essentially with “maybe it exists. Maybe sometimes it doesn’t. It really depends on a lot of things. The debate will rage on, and isn’t that the best part?” This makes the entire discussion formless.
Is it a good sports book? No— the majority of conversation is about other things, including Iranian artists, Swedish heroes, sugar beet farmers, and Shakespeare. Cohen says this is because the hot hand occurs across almost every discipline but come on; it’s obvious he could not find enough material in sports to fill the book. He drops his sports protagonist, Steph Curry, in chapter one and picks him back up again in the epilogue.
Is it well-written? F*ck no! If not for the content of the book, its writing is one-star, amateur-level. I highlighted this sentence in particular: “Miller didn’t appear nervous even when his insides were doing the Electric Slide.” “There was one passage in [Moneyball] about finance ... that might as well have been their erotica.” It’s written in such a salacious and stupid way.
This book was written on the shoulders of Moneyball for sure, but Moneyball is the superior read by leagues. It’s a better sports book; it’s a better analysis of data and human behavior; it’s a better narrative, written by a better author. The best portion of Cohen’s book were the sections he quoted Moneyball, which is to say, just read Moneyball.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 25, 2020
This was a fun book that reminded me of how much I enjoy the genre of modern sportswriting meets pop psychology meets statistics (a la Lewis, Gladwell, Epstein), and it did add a twist on the standard setup for a book of this genre. There were tons of interesting anecdotes and case studies that merged coherently under the umbrella of the study of streaks, spanning Shakespeare and classical music, gambling, the justice system (immigration judges), Soviet prisons (what a fascinating story), active vs passive investing, and of course basketball.
The central thesis of the book was well presented and structured. The first half sets up the concept of the hot hand being illusory - an example of people misperceiving patterns within randomness, and attributing too much meaning to events within they control (the gambler's fallacy in this framing was interesting - people seem to expect streaks to continue when they are on a roll, but expect outcomes to mean revert when they are outside of their control). The second half rebuts this thesis with the idea that sometimes the truth lies nearby but needs a bit of excavation, often in the form of new data. The big takeaway of the book, told via the story of an unlikely pair of heroes, is the thesis that seminal studies on the hot hand (including work by the great Amos Tversky) suffered from a sampling error, and that evidence for the durability of streaks has been under our noses for a long time.
I enjoyed reading this as a follow up to cement this point:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...
The central thesis of the book was well presented and structured. The first half sets up the concept of the hot hand being illusory - an example of people misperceiving patterns within randomness, and attributing too much meaning to events within they control (the gambler's fallacy in this framing was interesting - people seem to expect streaks to continue when they are on a roll, but expect outcomes to mean revert when they are outside of their control). The second half rebuts this thesis with the idea that sometimes the truth lies nearby but needs a bit of excavation, often in the form of new data. The big takeaway of the book, told via the story of an unlikely pair of heroes, is the thesis that seminal studies on the hot hand (including work by the great Amos Tversky) suffered from a sampling error, and that evidence for the durability of streaks has been under our noses for a long time.
I enjoyed reading this as a follow up to cement this point:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...
August 26, 2024
The Hot Hand by Ben Cohen delves into the concept of the "Hot Hand" and explores the controversy as to whether the "Hot Hand" really exists or if it is just an occurrence that cannot be explained by the laws of probability. I guess I should begin by explaining exactly what the "Hot Hand" is. The "Hot Hand" is a bias that a person who experiences a successful outcome has a greater chance of success in future attempts. The opposite of the "Hot Hand" is that after a person has had a hot streak they will regress to the mean and future performance will suffer.
The "Hot Hand" is often cited in sports such as basketball when a player is making a percentage of shots higher that they have historically made. However, it can also be found in things such as stock investing, gambling, creative thinking etc. Mr. Cohen even looks into the "Hot Hand" of Einstein and Van Gogh.
There is no question that people have streaks (both hot and cold) the question is should you continue to bet on the streak or should you take a step back and lower your expectations for the future. I guess if you believe in the "Hot Hand" you should find the stockbroker who had the best performance in 2023 and invest all of your money with him in 2024. If you don't believe in the "Hot Hand" well, you should probably invest with some other broker.
The Book mainly looks at the "Hot Hand" as it applies to basketball however it does look into many other areas. Does the "Hot Hand" really exist? I'll let you read this book and form your own conclusion.
The "Hot Hand" is often cited in sports such as basketball when a player is making a percentage of shots higher that they have historically made. However, it can also be found in things such as stock investing, gambling, creative thinking etc. Mr. Cohen even looks into the "Hot Hand" of Einstein and Van Gogh.
There is no question that people have streaks (both hot and cold) the question is should you continue to bet on the streak or should you take a step back and lower your expectations for the future. I guess if you believe in the "Hot Hand" you should find the stockbroker who had the best performance in 2023 and invest all of your money with him in 2024. If you don't believe in the "Hot Hand" well, you should probably invest with some other broker.
The Book mainly looks at the "Hot Hand" as it applies to basketball however it does look into many other areas. Does the "Hot Hand" really exist? I'll let you read this book and form your own conclusion.
May 23, 2020
The story of "the hot hand," the belief that multiple successes can lead to basketball or others (composers, artists, film directors) having periods where they excel above their normal performance level, is an interesting one, but not sufficient for a whole book, or at least not this one. In The Hot Hand, Cohen describes how the hot hand was first debunked as a fallacy of the human psyche inclined to notice false order in randomness, before it was eventually "de-debunked" by researchers who reconsidered the data. This main narrative is interwoven with "hot hand" stories about Steph Curry, movie director Rob Reiner and an obscure female composer, as well as the story of creator of the video game NBA Jam, which so well evokes the idea of the hot hand in its gameplay.
In addition, the book includes stories about a sugar beet farmer, Raoul Wallenberg, a refugee Iraqi artist and a lost Van Gogh painting that have nothing to do with the Hot Hand. Rather, they deal with psychological bias and data collection and analysis. While these points loosely tie to the studies on the Hot Hand, the stories themselves are too far afield to connect, and seem like content needed to get the book up to 300 pages.
The book is well written, and Cohen is likable and makes the people in the stories likable. It's also an impressively researched book with a huge bibliography and end notes that comprehensively support every chapter.
In addition, the book includes stories about a sugar beet farmer, Raoul Wallenberg, a refugee Iraqi artist and a lost Van Gogh painting that have nothing to do with the Hot Hand. Rather, they deal with psychological bias and data collection and analysis. While these points loosely tie to the studies on the Hot Hand, the stories themselves are too far afield to connect, and seem like content needed to get the book up to 300 pages.
The book is well written, and Cohen is likable and makes the people in the stories likable. It's also an impressively researched book with a huge bibliography and end notes that comprehensively support every chapter.
August 27, 2023
Here's one choice example from the book: it turns out that the very people who believe the most in the gambler's fallacy, demonstrated by them betting that the roulette wheel will even out, are also those who most believe in the hot hand. So they believe that if they win several times they are more likely to win the next time but that if the roulette wheel comes up red several times in a row it's less likely to come up red the next time. One explanation is that it's about your belief about the animate and inanimate, an idea I find fascinating.
I really enjoyed this book. Lots of fascinating stories. Unfortunately, it did a poor job of explaining and elucidating the hot hand phenomenon/bias. In particular, he completely drops the ball on explaining the math behind the error in the classic paper and doesn't do a good job of explaining the math in the new paper either. Also, many of the stories have only the most tenuous connection to the subject matter of the book. But, as I said, I really enjoyed the book because those stories were all very interesting, presumably that's why he could not resist telling them. Or maybe I should have said that the connection was not at all illustrative. Anyway, I don't regret I read this at all and if you are someone who's quite interested in cognitive biases and in this phenomena as well, I would say to go ahead and read it.
Anyway, for me it was a four-star experience even though I think it is a three-star book
I really enjoyed this book. Lots of fascinating stories. Unfortunately, it did a poor job of explaining and elucidating the hot hand phenomenon/bias. In particular, he completely drops the ball on explaining the math behind the error in the classic paper and doesn't do a good job of explaining the math in the new paper either. Also, many of the stories have only the most tenuous connection to the subject matter of the book. But, as I said, I really enjoyed the book because those stories were all very interesting, presumably that's why he could not resist telling them. Or maybe I should have said that the connection was not at all illustrative. Anyway, I don't regret I read this at all and if you are someone who's quite interested in cognitive biases and in this phenomena as well, I would say to go ahead and read it.
Anyway, for me it was a four-star experience even though I think it is a three-star book
May 12, 2022
I really enjoyed this book, and have been interested in the field of people "finding patterns where there are none" for years. The book by Kahneman ("Thinking Fast and Slow") was one of my favorites, and I liked "The Undoing Project" by Michael Lewis. The Hot Hand explores the evidence for and against streakiness in a variety of subjects, centered on basketball but including unrelated fields like farming, arts, literature, etc. Some reviewers have apparently found these diversions to be off-putting. I did not, although I did not like the way Cohen kept switching between stories during a chapter. I would have preferred a cleaner break between stories, such as devoting entire chapters to them. As a scientist myself, I loved the way he made it clear that one must rely on the data for the truth, and also points out that more and better data lead to more solid conclusions. While the debate is still open, as all scientific questions are, the current evidence seems to suggest that hot streaks do exist. However, they are probably not as large as many viewers perceive, and we do have a clear tendency to see patterns where none exist. I especially appreciated the discussion of the "shuffle" mode on the iPOD and the difficulty convincing people that it was working correctly. I think a great many people, but not all, will enjoy this book.
February 5, 2021
I was excited to read this book because I believed it would be revealing about one of the most psychological aspects of sports, the ability to get on a hot streak. The stories about basketball and the truth for the hot hand made the book somewhat worth my anticipation. Although to get to the current verdict on the topic of the hot hand Ben Cohen takes you through many other stories that aren’t necessarily relevant to the hot hand, in the way most sports fans think of it.
Regardless these stories are interesting and well written. Particularly, the story of the search for an imprisoned WWII hero through the use of data was fascinating. The book takes you through the scientific process of whether the hot hand exists. After winding its way through lots of stories that are varyingly related to the topic it arrives at a bizarre conclusion describing a mathematical anomaly that changes everything that was thought about the hot hand. I recommend anyone struggling to understand the final conclusion to read the original research paper by Josh Miller and Adam Sanjurjo since it is not explained well in the book. In conclusion I came away believing what I did going into the book regarding the hot hand.
Regardless these stories are interesting and well written. Particularly, the story of the search for an imprisoned WWII hero through the use of data was fascinating. The book takes you through the scientific process of whether the hot hand exists. After winding its way through lots of stories that are varyingly related to the topic it arrives at a bizarre conclusion describing a mathematical anomaly that changes everything that was thought about the hot hand. I recommend anyone struggling to understand the final conclusion to read the original research paper by Josh Miller and Adam Sanjurjo since it is not explained well in the book. In conclusion I came away believing what I did going into the book regarding the hot hand.
May 11, 2021
Confusing structure, fascinating topic
The topic is fascinating but I found the structure of the book hard to follow. The notion that we can be hot, which is to say that we can have streaks I’m good like in high-performance, makes a heck of a lot of sense to me. I seem to notice it myself even an intellectual pursuits.
This book explores the drama through which this topic is been explored in academic circles. At first it was refuted, then it was proved, and now it’s an open question. The exploration of this topic makes the book worth reading.
However, you might be wondering why I’m giving it two stars. It’s a worthy Book to read, however I struggled with how each chapter would bounce around between dramatically different and varying stories. One moment you’d be reading about World War II, and the next moment you’ll be reading about the NBA and then the next moment you’ll be reading about academia. I just find the interweaving of all these various stories in each chapter hard to track. It adds a level of friction to the reading that I didn’t enjoy. Each of the stories themselves are fascinating, but I would’ve loved for them to be focused on individually in each chapter, instead of inter-leaving them all.
The topic is fascinating but I found the structure of the book hard to follow. The notion that we can be hot, which is to say that we can have streaks I’m good like in high-performance, makes a heck of a lot of sense to me. I seem to notice it myself even an intellectual pursuits.
This book explores the drama through which this topic is been explored in academic circles. At first it was refuted, then it was proved, and now it’s an open question. The exploration of this topic makes the book worth reading.
However, you might be wondering why I’m giving it two stars. It’s a worthy Book to read, however I struggled with how each chapter would bounce around between dramatically different and varying stories. One moment you’d be reading about World War II, and the next moment you’ll be reading about the NBA and then the next moment you’ll be reading about academia. I just find the interweaving of all these various stories in each chapter hard to track. It adds a level of friction to the reading that I didn’t enjoy. Each of the stories themselves are fascinating, but I would’ve loved for them to be focused on individually in each chapter, instead of inter-leaving them all.
April 12, 2022
A number of interesting stories about interesting people, but most of them are quite tangential to the topic. The stories also stop and start at an annoying cadence and you rarely know when a story has ended. Most stories fail to come together to form a cohesive whole. While the author includes a lot of scattered thoughts from academics who have delved into the topic, he doesn’t really have any interesting thoughts of his own. The points in the book about streaks can be summarized as follows:
People are generally bad at knowing what randomness actually looks like.
People tend to bet on a reversal of fortune in defined random events (coin flips, dice rolls, roulette wheels, etc.), also known as “Gamblers fallacy” and continuations of fortune when it involves humans or animals (athletes, fund managers, racehorses, etc.) also known as “hot hand” fallacy.
Big data collected by the motion tracking cameras on basketball courts does tend to support the idea that there is a “warm hand” that can happen to athletes where they can perform about 12% better when they’re “hot”.
People are generally bad at knowing what randomness actually looks like.
People tend to bet on a reversal of fortune in defined random events (coin flips, dice rolls, roulette wheels, etc.), also known as “Gamblers fallacy” and continuations of fortune when it involves humans or animals (athletes, fund managers, racehorses, etc.) also known as “hot hand” fallacy.
Big data collected by the motion tracking cameras on basketball courts does tend to support the idea that there is a “warm hand” that can happen to athletes where they can perform about 12% better when they’re “hot”.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 128 reviews