Maybe the World Cup Wasn’t the Best Example

In our recent New York Times column, we talked about what makes people good at what they do.

As one example, we conjectured (based on some academic work done by others) that people born in the early months of the year would be overrepresented on World Cup rosters. The underlying theory is that in 1997, FIFA made January 1 the cutoff for determining ages in all international soccer competitions. If this rule had an important impact in determining who made the national youth soccer teams, then these early selection rules would play out to more long run success at the highest levels of soccer. The academic evidence is that these national teams are overwhelmingly made up of players born early in the calendar year, even on the age 21 and under teams, where a few months of physical development isn’t likely to make a big difference. A commenter on our blog, Bill Loyd, has done some hard work to gather data and argues that for past World Cups and for a few of the 2006 squads that he found, he doesn’t see the pattern we predict.

Why might this be the case? For the earlier World Cups, it might not be very surprising that no pattern is there because the FIFA rule didn’t come in until 1997. More fundamentally, the FIFA selection rules and the rules that different countries use for play within the county differ.

For instance, as many readers have emailed us, in the U.S., the age cutoffs tend to be in the summer. In Germany, the within country age cutoff is August 1. Thus, in soccer there are two different competitive pressures at work: one pushing towards more players born in the early months and the other towards more players in the later months. Much of the study of birth-date timing focuses on the cutoff rules within countries, virtually all of them finding important effects.

In light of this difference between FIFA and country rules, the example we gave of the World Cup might not have been the best one, even though the age effect is very strong in the national youth squads that feed many World Cup teams.

This shouldn’t distract from the important fact that the evidence in the literature overwhelming supports the basic point — that across many activities, you can identify long-term effects of essentially arbitrary age cutoffs early in life.

Perhaps a better example than the World Cup would have been the N.H.L. Here is one graph that I found on the web of the birth month of NHL hockey players versus Canadians and Americans more generally:

The black-and-white dots are the NHL players, who are much more likely to be born in January and February and much less likely to be born September-December. This is the sort of pattern that appears over and over in these sorts of studies.

Some other readers have offered a clever, very Freakonomics-y alternative explanation for these age patterns: the parents are lying about their child’s birthday. If the parents want the kid to be a star, they take an older kid and change his date of birth to make him eligible to play with younger children. While I don’t think this is actually the primary reason for what people find in these studies, is definitely worth thinking about.

TAGS:

Leave A Comment

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

 

COMMENTS: 118

View All Comments »
  1. dkane says:

    “one graph that I found on the web” is an, uh, interesting piece of evidence. Amazing what appears on the web. Why not provide a link so that Bill Lloyd can check if this claim is as, uh, accurate as the previous claims made about World Cup soccer players?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  2. dkane says:

    “one graph that I found on the web” is an, uh, interesting piece of evidence. Amazing what appears on the web. Why not provide a link so that Bill Lloyd can check if this claim is as, uh, accurate as the previous claims made about World Cup soccer players?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  3. A reader writes:

    Gentlemen,

    I am a hockey broadcaster in Canada who thoroughly enjoyed “Freakonomics”.
    I read with interest the piece in the NY Times magazine about European
    soccer stars and their birth months (“A Star Is Made”, May 7).

    Hockey provides an interesting case study. Most elite hockey players from
    North America are born in the first three months of the year. In fact,
    approximately 3/4 of the players in the Hockey Hall of Fame were born in
    January, February or March.

    But it’s an entirely different case among elite level European players,
    especially those from the old Eastern Bloc. Why? Because unlike North
    America, hockey programs in those nations are part of the school system, and
    thus use the school calendar as their basis. When looking at the highest
    scoring European players, we find mostly September, October and November
    birthdates.

    The “birth month” issue is well known in Canadian hockey circles, as
    evidenced by an episode in suburban Toronto several years ago. A couple had
    a child born on New Year’s eve, very close to midnight. The father begged
    the doctor to alter the birth records to say that the child was born on
    January 1.

    The doctor suspected that the father may have been trying to pull a “New
    Year’s baby” scam and refused. The discussion became heated, and the police
    were brought in.

    It turns out the father was an obsessed hockey parent who wanted to give his
    son “a leg up” in his future hockey endeavors by having his child be the
    oldest in his age group as opposed to the youngest.

    Your work is entertaining and excellent. Please keep it up.

    Sincerely,

    Gord Miller
    Commentator
    The Sports Network

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  4. A reader writes:

    Gentlemen,

    I am a hockey broadcaster in Canada who thoroughly enjoyed “Freakonomics”.
    I read with interest the piece in the NY Times magazine about European
    soccer stars and their birth months (“A Star Is Made”, May 7).

    Hockey provides an interesting case study. Most elite hockey players from
    North America are born in the first three months of the year. In fact,
    approximately 3/4 of the players in the Hockey Hall of Fame were born in
    January, February or March.

    But it’s an entirely different case among elite level European players,
    especially those from the old Eastern Bloc. Why? Because unlike North
    America, hockey programs in those nations are part of the school system, and
    thus use the school calendar as their basis. When looking at the highest
    scoring European players, we find mostly September, October and November
    birthdates.

    The “birth month” issue is well known in Canadian hockey circles, as
    evidenced by an episode in suburban Toronto several years ago. A couple had
    a child born on New Year’s eve, very close to midnight. The father begged
    the doctor to alter the birth records to say that the child was born on
    January 1.

    The doctor suspected that the father may have been trying to pull a “New
    Year’s baby” scam and refused. The discussion became heated, and the police
    were brought in.

    It turns out the father was an obsessed hockey parent who wanted to give his
    son “a leg up” in his future hockey endeavors by having his child be the
    oldest in his age group as opposed to the youngest.

    Your work is entertaining and excellent. Please keep it up.

    Sincerely,

    Gord Miller
    Commentator
    The Sports Network

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  5. To dkane:

    I don’t know where Levitt’s graph comes from, but here’s a link we’ve cited a few times in related threads here that should be of interest to you:

    http://www.socialproblemindex.ualberta.ca/relage.htm

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  6. To dkane:

    I don’t know where Levitt’s graph comes from, but here’s a link we’ve cited a few times in related threads here that should be of interest to you:

    http://www.socialproblemindex.ualberta.ca/relage.htm

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  7. dratskee says:

    I’m glad you guys posted this correction/follow-up! Interesting topic. I skipped a grade and have a late birthday, so I’m pleased to have an excuse for my poor athletic skills.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  8. dratskee says:

    I’m glad you guys posted this correction/follow-up! Interesting topic. I skipped a grade and have a late birthday, so I’m pleased to have an excuse for my poor athletic skills.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0