South Korea - Women's V-League 2020-2021

    You can also just search the "popular video stream site" for that text

    Quote from volleyballdavely11

    she scored 26 points with 38% efficiency

    I'm curious if by "efficiency" you mean Hitting % or Kill %?


    Japan seems to have different 'ratings' methodologies and I want to understand them in line with the rest of the world.


    It's also true of reception. Japan does this thing where they get 1 point for "excellent" and .5 points for a non-error, then divide that by touches. So their "reception" % is usually in the 60s. They make no accounting for errors. Correct me if I'm wrong, but everybody else does: <Excellents minus Errors divided by Touches> and they average in the 30s.


    I don't want to do any math but it's apples to oranges if I don't


    It's the hitting/attacking success rate. You can do the calculations yourself to verify with the link below.


    For example, Lazareva had 36 successful hits on 76 attempts => 36/76 = 47.37%


    She also had 1 ace and 1 block for a total of 38 points, but the "efficiency" indicator here only calculates hits.


    https://www.kovo.co.kr/stats/4…=017&e_pr=201%7C1&part=at



    For the reception % in Korea, it's the standard (Perfect - Errors)/Attempts.


    For example Hwang Min-kyung => (14-5)/33 = 27.27%


    https://www.kovo.co.kr/stats/4…n=017&e_pr=201%7C1&part=r

    Quote from econmtl

    It's the hitting/attacking success rate. You can do the calculations yourself to verify with the link below.


    For example, Lazareva had 36 successful hits on 76 attempts => 36/76 = 47.37%


    She also had 1 ace and 1 block for a total of 38 points, but the "efficiency" indicator here only calculates hits.

    I'm not sure why Japan does what they do for reception :rolll:


    I guess you are using what I understand as "Kill%" = success/attempts. I used to run fast and loose with terms like "batting average" or "attack rate" :) brahmin pointed out to me that what I was talking about was "Kill%" and that it is different from "Hitting %", which (more like reception %) is (Success–Errors)/Attempts.


    Hitting % is interesting. Especially for players who make a lot of errors. For example:

    Player A

    50/100 with 10 errors gets a 50% Kill% and a 40% Hit%.


    Player B

    45/100 with 5 errors gets a 45% Kill% and a 40% Hit%


    Which would you rather have as a player?

    I actually just copied what the KOVO page and theloneracer gave me in terms of stats xD

    but I think econmtl explained it well.

    I can totally see where you are coming from with being confused about other countries and different calculation methods since I once tried to research Japanese receiving and hitting stats and really struggled to make sense of it all haha

    Definitely did not help that everything was in japanese :S

    Quote from econmtl

    What's even more impressive to me is her 20 diggs, just one shy of her libero Shin Yeon-gyeong. She's now third in the entire league (granted only two games have been played so far...) in diggs behind liberos Oh Ji-young and Shin Yeon-gyeong. That's how insane her first game was. And even in the KOVO Cup, we saw how good she was on the defensive side.


    The new foreign players this year are good defenders as well. We know about Rousseaux, but even if she wasn't in the greatest shape during the Kovo Cup, Kelsie impressed me as a defender.


    It's gonna be a good year my friends!

    Totall agree with you, both Lazareva and Rousseaux played very well but it does spark the question to me; what are both Hyundai and IBK going to do if their foreign players get injured/have a off-day?

    Definitely do not wish for anybody to be injured of course but whats the winning condition for IBK if Lazareva cannot score almost 40 pts every game?

    Maybe there is hope when Kim Heejin comes back fully healthy even though she plays MB now.

    And Hyundai, well there is Jung Jiyoon but their wings are in similar shape like last season, good receiving (generally) but on the weaker side in offense, thats why Hyundai funneled so many of their attacks through the Middle Blockers in the past seasons with LDY.


    But we will see I guess :D

    After all there were only 2 games played so far, the season is long

    Just finished watching IBK vs KGC. Lazareva did well! Also just realized Hang Song Yi was playing. She looked so different now from last time I saw her playing. I've read here that she switched to MB and only recognized her with her serve. Diouf looks so heavy and slow. It's like she barely lifts off the ground when she jumps. Lol. Good thing for her that she's super tall.

    Hi everyone!


    I saw odds for tomorrow game between Caltex and Heungkuk... And I am confused. I would say that match is closer than almost 94% to win by Pink Spiders (odd 1.07).


    This is first match for Heungkuk, but I'm not sure if Fresco is so much better player than Lutz. Lutz efficiency is bad but still, she is able to score 30 points.


    What bout Korean players? Is this really so big level difference between national players in Caltex and Heungkuk? Just can't understand this strange odds 🙄


    Edit: Okay. I saw on the roster Lee Jae-Young and Kim Yeon-Koung. But they are playing away, so 1.07 is really strange, because bookies thinks that should be easy 0:3.

    For the match against Heungkuk during the KOVO Cup, Lazareva's attack success rate was 38.71% and her attack efficiency (or spike efficiency) was 29.03%.


    The percentage number in the brackets shown under the "Attack" column in my match stats summaries is the success rate and is not for attack efficiency. However the percentage number found in the brackets under the "Receive" column is for receive efficiency.


    I decide to not include the attack efficiency in my stat summaries for two reasons. Firstly, it is too time consuming to work it out for every single players and secondly it is easy to find the numbers needed to work out a player's attack efficiency from the stats provided by KOVO.


    I hope this help sort out the confusion people had with what the number in my match stats summaries means.

    In a related procedural question, what is the best way to notate this stuff? 8,21/53 or 53/21-8, or what? This example being 21 successes with 8 errors on 53 attempts.


    When I sometimes give an 'attack success rate', which I call the "Kill%" I do it for the same reason as you. That's what Japan lists and I don't want to do math -- until it's useful :) like pointing out that Neriman has the same "Hit%" (efficiency) as Mizuki Yanagita.


    There's also the whole nomenclature thing: 'efficiency', 'percentage' 'rate'. When I started doing this I called it the "attack rate" because that's what google translated the Japanese as. Then I went with "batting average" because that's how I roll :S


    This caused brahmin to pull all his hair out


    I just discovered in the Turkey thread that they (maybe all Europe) have a third way of describing reception, different from Japan and FIVB--which is what you use, correct? (excellents – errors) / all touches

    Quote from Alves

    Can you tell me what's going on with this odds in the match between Caltex and Heungkuk? My question is two posts earlier :)

    I would love to help but I have no idea on why this is.


    There was talk about some of the GS Caltex players are not in the best condition. GS head coach mention that Han Soo-Ji has a waist problem and Kang So-Hwi's abs ain't good and her knees are the same (Source: 1 & 2). And despite GS Caltex beating Heungkuk at KOVO Cup, I think most people still expect Heungkuk to win the league. Heungkuk have a really strong team on paper, they have like 4 Korean NT representatives in their starting lineup (5 NT level players if you included Fresco) so it is not surprising the odds are the way they are. Another aspect in Heungkuk favour is that this will be there first match and they are still fresh while GS played are full 5-set match just a few days ago.


    I'm not a betting man so I have never taken an interest in these things but you can try to monitor the Koreans news sources to find the latest news. You can try Naver (which has articles from various media sources) or you can try thespike.co.kr, they usually release articles with pre-match interview with the head coaches just before the matches.

    Quote from theloneracer

    I would love to help but I have no idea on why this is.


    There was talk about some of the GS Caltex players are not in the best condition. GS head coach mention that Han Soo-Ji has a waist problem and Kang So-Hwi's abs ain't good and her knees are the same (Source: 1 & 2). And despite GS Caltex beating Heungkuk at KOVO Cup, I think most people still expect Heungkuk to win the league. Heungkuk have a really strong team on paper, they have like 4 Korean NT representatives in their starting lineup (5 NT level players if you included Fresco) so it is not surprising the odds are the way they are. Another aspect in Heungkuk favour is that this will be there first match and they are still fresh while GS played are full 5-set match just a few days ago.


    I'm not a betting man so I have never taken an interest in these things but you can try to monitor the Koreans news sources to find the latest news. You can try Naver (which has articles from various media sources) or you can try thespike.co.kr, they usually release articles with pre-match interview with the head coaches just before the matches.

    Before the match I can take a look at starting lineups in TV :D but I got it.


    1.07 is like 93% to win the game. It is just to many. First match in the season so they're fresh. You're right, but also maybe they need some time to perform like future league champions. And that is away game for Heungkuk.


    And this cup match. Caltex won 3:0. I know, that was close, but still. All the players were on the pitch, so... Yeah, it is strange. Thank you :)

    IMO it would be 21 - 8 - # of attack blocked/5 for attack efficiency as it match the formula that is used to calculate efficiency in volleyball but the more numbers you write down, particularly in a cell, the more confusing it look.


    Even though I tried to make it easy as possible for everyone to understand by putting it in simple maths like 21/56 (37.50%) which is how you find the success rate, people still got confused. Imagine putting in more figure to this it may confuse more people.


    Yes the way I calculate the receive efficiency is the same way the Japan, FIVB and KOVO.

    Quote from theloneracer

    IMO it would be 21 - 8 - # of attack blocked/5 for attack efficiency as it match the formula that is used to calculate efficiency in volleyball but the more numbers you write down, particularly in a cell, the more confusing it look.


    Even though I tried to make it easy as possible for everyone to understand by putting it in simple maths like 21/56 (37.50%) which is how you find the success rate, people still got confused. Imagine putting in more figure to this it may confuse more people.


    Yes the way I calculate the receive efficiency is the same way the Japan, FIVB and KOVO.

    I don't have access to how many attacks by a player were blocked. That would be cool to know as something different from just a non-kill. (maybe Japan counts a blocked ball as an error?) Also, we don't get "dig" numbers :(


    Japan and FIVB don't calculate receive stats the same. FIVB does straight up: (excellents – errors) / touches. Japan makes no accounting for errors. They do (1 X Excellents + .5 X non-errors) / touches. So Japan reception winners are in the 60-70% range. FIVB and I guess Korea are in 30-40% range. Turkey's are, I guess in the 70s. I don't know the formula they use but an example given was: "if you got %60 positive and 40% perfect reception, your overall reception would be %50".


    What got me interested in wanting to understand this was not that your stats are confusing. Someone posted recently that in FIVB tournaments a decade ago reception winners were in the 50% range. Now they are in the 30% range. The reason given was that serves have gotten much better. But it seemed to me that they must be calculating it differently than I understand it ... because even a decade ago if/when serves were not as good, 50% would be a poor win (the way Japan calculates it). FIVB calculates reception efficiency like hitting efficiency: Kills and/or Excellents minus errors divided by touches. There's no accounting for non-kills that aren't errors nor receptions that are playable but weren't excellent.


    Or maybe I still don't get it :rolll:

    If anyone is interested, the latest Korean high school volleyball tournament final is about to start between Hanbom H.S. vs Mokpo Girls' Comm. H.S..

    You can find the other matches including the girls' middle school for this competition on the same channel. Not all the prominent teams participated in this comp.



    ** Just warning everyone again, this is not pretty volleyball like how the Japanese high school is. **

    Don't worry about it. Different group of people will alway have their own unique way of measuring thing. For example, Americans still refusing to change to the metric system.


    Another thing you might have neglected is the development of the actual volleyball ball. I'm guessing the old volleyball balls didn't move in the air as much as their modern counterpart making receiving a little bit harder.