"Home advantage is well documented for professional baseball, basketball and ice hockey in North America. One of the possible causes of this advantage is familiarity with the local playing facility. This was investigated and quantified in an analysis of 37 teams moving to new stadiums, but in the same city, from 1987 to 2001. Home advantage during the first season in a new stadium after the move was significantly less than home advantage in the final season in the old stadium (P= 0.011). The reduction was evident in all three sports. Possible confounding factors, such as crowd size and crowd density, were considered but did not appear to have an effect. It is estimated that about 24% of the advantage of playing at home maybe lost when a team relocates to a new facility."

"The home advantage is a robust phenomenon that occurs in the world of amateur and professional sport. Athletic teams have been shown to win significantly more games in their home venue as compared to their opponents' venue. Studies have suggested that the home advantage may be related to familiarity with the facility, increased crowd density and even pre-competition hormonal levels. The present study investigated pre-competition physiological and psychological states of elite hockey players in the home and away venues. Physiological measures included salivary cortisol and testosterone, which were assessed using enzyme immunoassays. In addition, pre-competition psychological states were assessed using the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2. Physiological measures indicated that the players had significantly higher pre-game testosterone when playing in their home venue as compared to their opponents' venue (t(13)=2.29, p=0.04); however, this difference was not due to a pre-game rise in testosterone while competing at home. Furthermore, players showed a trend toward higher pre-game cortisol when playing in their home venue (t(13)=1.96, p=0.07). Psychological measures indicated that players were more self-confident when playing in their home venue (t(13)=2.8, p=0.008) and also had higher somatic (t(13)=2.3, p=0.02) and cognitive anxiety (t(13)=1.87, p=0.04) when playing in their opponents' venue. The present study supports the notion that there are differences in pre-competition hormonal and psychological states that may play a key role in the "home advantage"."

"Home advantage is quantitatively defined and calculated for each season since the start of the main professional sports in North America and England. Over 400,000 games are analysed. The leagues represented are the National League (1876-2002) and American League (1901-2002) for baseball, the National Hockey League (1917-2003) for ice hockey, the National Football League (1933-2002) for American football, the National Basketball Association (1946-2003) for basketball, and the four levels of professional football, formerly called the Football League, in England (1888-2003). Problems caused by unbalanced playing schedules are considered. The results are presented graphically to show long-term trends and sudden changes. The highest levels of home advantage for all sports were in their early years of existence. Home advantage in ice hockey, basketball and football in England has declined over the last two decades. In baseball there has been very little change over the last 100 years, with home advantage consistently lower than in other sports. There was a large drop in home advantage in football in England following the 7-year suspension of the league during the Second World War. The trends and changes provide some evidence that travel and familiarity contribute to home advantage, but little in support of crowd effects."

"There have been many examples of contentious points decisions in boxing. Professional boxing is scored subjectively by judges and referees scoring each round of the contest. We assessed whether the probability of a home win (and therefore home advantage) increased when bouts were decided by points decisions rather than knockouts. Overall, we found that bouts ending in points decisions had a significantly higher proportion of home wins than those decided by a knockout, though this effect varied across time, and controlling for relative quality of boxers was only effective when using more recent data. Focusing on these data, again the probability of a home win was higher with a points decision and this effect was consistent as “relative quality” varied. For equally matched boxers (“relative quality” = 0), expected probability of a home win was 0.57 for knockouts, 0.66 for technical knockouts and 0.74 for points decisions. The results of the present study lend general support to the notion that home advant..."

"Two studies were performed to determine the influence of game location on the strategic decisions of ice hockey coaches. In study 1, coaches from the National (n = 23) and Ontario Hockey Leagues (n = 17) indicated the degree to which they had their teams forecheck assertively at home versus away. In study 2, video analysis of 62 National Hockey League games was used to verify the extent to which teams in this league use an assertive forechecking strategy at home versus away. In study 1, coaches reported that they implemented a more assertive forechecking style at home versus away (P < 0.001). The results of the video analysis in study 2 were consistent with the coaches' reports: teams used a more assertive forechecking style at home versus away (P < 0.03). The results are discussed in terms of their implications for the home advantage in the National Hockey League."

"This review identifies the most likely causes of home advantage. The results of previous studies have identified 4 factors thought to be responsible for the home advantage. These can be categorised under the general headings of crowd, learning, travel and rule factors. From the accumulated evidence, rule factors were found to play only a minor role (in a limited number of sports) in contributing to home advantage. Studies investigating the effect of learning factors found that little benefit was to be gained from being familiar with the local conditions when playing at home. There was evidence to suggest that travel factors were responsible for part of the home advantage, provided the journey involved crossing a number of time zones. However, since high levels of home advantage are observed within countries where travel distances are not great, travel factors were not thought to be a major cause of home advantage. The evidence from studies investigating crowd factors appeared to provide the most dominant causes of home advantage. A number of studies provide strong evidence that home advantage increases with crowd size, until the crowd reaches a certain size or consistency (a more balanced number of home and away supporters), after which a peak in home advantage is observed. Two possible mechanisms were proposed to explain these observations: either (i) the crowd is able to raise the performance of the home competitors relative to the away competitors; or (ii) the crowd is able to influence the officials to subconsciously favour the home team. The literature supports the latter to be the most important and dominant explanation. Clearly, it only takes 2 or 3 crucial decisions to go against the away team or in favour of the home team to give the side playing at home the 'edge'."

"Home advantage is smaller in baseball than in other major professional sports for men, specifically football, basketball, or soccer. This paper advances an explanation. It begins by reviewing the main observations to support the view that there is little or no home advantage in individual sports. It then presents the case that home advantage originates in impaired teamwork among the away players. The need for teamwork and the extent of it vary from sport to sport. To the extent that a sport requires little teamwork it is more like an individual sport, and the home team would be expected to enjoy only a small advantage. Interactions among players on the same side (teamwork) are much less common in baseball than in the other sports considered."

"This review identifies the most likely causes of home advantage. The results of previous studies have identified 4 factors thought to be responsible for the home advantage. These can be categorised under the general headings of crowd, learning, travel and rule factors. From the accumulated evidence, rule factors were found to play only a minor role (in a limited number of sports) in contributing to home advantage. Studies investigating the effect of learning factors found that little benefit was to be gained from being familiar with the local conditions when playing at home. There was evidence to suggest that travel factors were responsible for part of the home advantage, provided the journey involved crossing a number of time zones. However, since high levels of home advantage are observed within countries where travel distances are not great, travel factors were not thought to be a major cause of home advantage. The evidence from studies investigating crowd factors appeared to provide the most dominant causes of home advantage.A number of studies provide strong evidence that home advantage increases with crowd size, until the crowd reaches a certain size or consistency (a more balanced number of home and away supporters), after which a peak in home advantage is observed. Two possible mechanisms were proposed to explain these observations: either (i) the crowd is able to raise the performance of the home competitors relative to the away competitors; or (ii) the crowd is able to influence the officials to subconsciously favour the home team. The literature supports the latter to be the most important and dominant explanation. Clearly, it only takes 2 or 3 crucial decisions to go against the away team or in favour of the home team to give the side playing at home the ‘edge’."

"A behavioral economist and a veteran Sports Illustrated writer analyze hidden influences and subtle biases that shape sports plays, covering such topics as performance pressures, the "home field advantage" and the overpayment of athletic talent. Reprint."

"The rules of baseball have an intriguing quirk that other major-league sports do not have, namely, the sequential order of play which always affords the last at-bat to the home team. We became interested in exploring the strategic effects of this quirk. If there is a significant strategic advantage (or disadvantage) to having the last at-bat, it may show up as a difference in win percentage of the home team in close games, where strategy is more important, compared to the win percentage of home teams in games which are blowouts. Our paper is motivated by attempting to exploit the "natural experiment" of comparing close games to blowouts.

In previous literature, the possibility that strategic effects might come into play because of the sequential nature of the play is only partially recognized. For example, Carmichael and Thomas state as their third reason for home field advantage, "rules factors that may extend special privileges explicitly favoring the home team, such as the home team in baseball and softball always having the last 'bat.'"1 These authors only recognize the possibility that the last at-bat might give the home team the advantage when there is reason to believe that it is the visitors who actually have the advantage. Indeed, among baseball, basketball, hockey, football, and soccer, the strategic effect due to sequential play is only operative in baseball, yet baseball has the lowest home-field advantage of these five major sports.

The difference between the home winning percentage and the away winning percentage is statistically significantly positive for all major sports, but differs from sport to sport. In baseball, from 1901–2002, the average difference per team per year was 0.082, which for a .500 team in a 162 game season would lead approximately to records of 44-37 at home and 37-44 on the road."

"© Perceptual & Motor Skills 2015.Home advantage is smaller in baseball than in other major professional sports for men, specifically football, basketball, or soccer. This paper advances an explanation. It begins by reviewing the main observations to support the view that there is little or no home advantage in individual sports.

It then presents the case that home advantage originates in impaired teamwork among the away players. The need for teamwork and the extent of it vary from sport to sport. To the extent that a sport requires little teamwork it is more like an individual sport, and the home team would be expected to enjoy only a small advantage.

Interactions among players on the same side (teamwork) are much less common in baseball than in the other sports considered."

"Home advantage is a pervasive phenomenon in sport. It has been established in team sports such as basketball, baseball, American football, and European soccer. Attention to home advantage in individual sports has so far been limited. The aim of this study was to examine home advantage in professional tennis. Match-level data are used to measure home advantage. The test used is based on logit models, and consistent specification is addressed explicitly. Depending on the interpretation of home advantage, restrictions on the specification of the model need to be imposed. We find that although significant home advantage exists for men, the performance of women tennis players appears to be unaffected by home advantage."

"Objectives: Is the home advantage in individual sports comparable in magnitude and consistency to that in team sports? If not, is it nevertheless a major factor? The present paper reviews the literature to date with respect to these questions and augments it with original analyses where appropriate. Design: The review is framed and dominated by a design consideration, namely, that all major team sports play balanced home-and-away schedules, whereas individual sports rarely, if ever, do. As a result, it is necessary to take player quality into account in assessing home advantage in an individual sport. Method/approach: The paper begins with three individual sports (tennis, golf, and boxing) in which home advantage has been studied using available controls for player quality. It moves on to individual and team sports in the Olympics, where home advantage has also been studied with credible controls on player (country) quality. Studies are then reviewed in which player quality has not been controlled. Finally, data are presented for two individual efforts embedded in team sports (free throws in basketball and shootouts in ice hockey). Results: Subjectively evaluated sports such as diving, gymnastics, or figure skating usually show sizable and significant home advantages. Otherwise, occasional findings have been reported but they are not consistent within a sport, are generally weak, and often statistically unreliable. Conclusions: Except for subjectively evaluated sports, home advantage is not a major factor in individual sports, much less does it play a role in individual sports comparable to its role in team sports. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd."

"Summay.-Occurrence of the home field advantage in high school basketball was examined for percentages of games won at home and away for four male varsity basketball teams from 1968-1988. Statistically significant home advantage for three of the four teams extends previous findings that the difference in che size of the home advantage between sport levels, i.e., college and professional levels within the same sport, is minimal. Results are consistent with the contention that the effects of travel on the size of the home advantage are minimal. In a recent review of the home advantage in sport competitions, Cour-neya and Carron (1992) concluded that ddferences in the home advantage between college and professional teams within the same sport are minimal. The finding raises questions of whether the home advantage exists for high school teams and whether the advantage is similar in magnitude to those of college and professional teams. These questions bear upon the reasons the home advantage is observed in sports. Specifically, fatigue and disruption of routine associated with trav-el would be more hkely to operate in the college and professional teams as they spend considerably more time away from home, travel longer distances on road trips, and experience greater disruption of famhar routines such as eating and sleeping. Such influence would be less for high school teams, and, even if such factors are significant for the home advantage, the magni-tude should be smaller for high school teams. Courneya and Carron (1992) reported one study in which the home ad-vantage was examined at the high school level. McCutcheon (1984) noted that high school football teams won 54% of 218 games, basketball teams won 51% of 302 games, and cross-country track teams 54% of 100 meets and concluded that the home advantage in high school sports is relatively weaker than with college and professional sports. These percentages are con-siderably lower than the over-all home winning percentages of 64.4% for"