A Bad Outcome Does Not Mean a Bad Decision
Former poker pro Annie Duke says the Seahawks' doomed Super Bowl pass was good math undone by bad luck.
Peter Attia MD · #60 – Annie Duke: How to improve decision making, learning, & apply ‘backcasting’ for future successFormer professional poker player and cognitive psychologist Annie Duke was talking with physician Peter Attia about why good bets sometimes lose and bad bets sometimes win. Attia had raised a four-box grid of whether the choice was good or bad against whether the result was good or bad. Duke said the confusion comes from a shortcut she calls resulting.
“If I know what the quality of the outcome is I can work backwards from that to the quality of the decision,” Duke argues.
Duke argues that in poker, where cards are hidden and luck matters, losing does not prove you played badly. She says resulting works well in chess, where if you lose you were simply outplayed, but it works very poorly in poker and in football, where chance can sink a sound choice.
Her example is Seattle Seahawks coach Pete Carroll’s call at the end of the 2015 Super Bowl against the New England Patriots. Down by four points, with second down, 26 seconds left and one timeout, Carroll did not hand off to running back Marshawn Lynch. Quarterback Russell Wilson tried a pass, New England cornerback Malcolm Butler intercepted it, and Seattle lost.
Duke argues the math favored the pass. An interception there happens less than 2 percent of the time, she says, and an incomplete pass stops the clock. If Seattle merely hands to Lynch twice, it likely gets only two plays. By passing on first or second down, she says, Seattle could get that pass plus two runs, and that extra play was extremely valuable.
So why is the call still mocked? Duke points to transparency. She offers a thought experiment about driving to the airport with a spouse. Take the usual route, hit traffic, and miss the flight, and there is little blame. Announce a shortcut, hit the same traffic, and miss the same flight, and many people in that situation would get yelled at.
The same split applies on the goal line, she says. If Lynch had taken the handoff and fumbled, fans would have blamed Lynch, or credited the Patriots defense, but not Carroll. People excuse a decision that was expected, and blame the person who made an unexpected one.
Questions people ask
Why would passing give Seattle an extra play?
Seattle had second down, about 26 seconds left, and one timeout. Duke argues a pass, even if incomplete, stops the clock, so passing on first or second down could preserve time for three attempts instead of only two runs.
Who intercepted the pass and what happened next?
Butler, then a rookie Patriots cornerback, read the pick play and stepped in front of receiver Ricardo Lockette for the interception. It sealed New England's 28 to 24 win and became one of the most replayed finishes in Super Bowl history.
What exactly is "resulting"?
Resulting means using a bad outcome as proof of a bad decision, and a good outcome as proof of a good one. Duke argues it misleads whenever luck and hidden information matter, because the same choice can produce different results.