Why do the Nats play better on the road?

[Cinqo de Mayo]

I've been asking this question all season.

Here's an article from WaPo.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dc-sports-bog/wp/2017/09/14/hey-look-another-d-c-sports-team-sailing-toward-the-playoffs-uh-oh/?hpid=hp_local-news_dcsb-fear-5pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.049a2672e3c2

[dcpatti]

From a purely win/loss perspective, the results are almost identical: 43-30 at home, 45-27 on the road. Two or three games' variance could easily be influenced by all the double headers and rain makeup games which affected the home schedule and not the road schedule this season (and it's so hard to sweep a double header).

[spidernat]

bad hometown fans

[JCA-CrystalCity]

bad hometown fans

too many split loyalty fans at home diminishes the home field advantage.

[Ray D]

From a purely win/loss perspective, the results are almost identical: 43-30 at home, 45-27 on the road.

Still it's worse at home, and if it were actually identical then we would still be playing bad at home: normally a teams home record is significantly better than their away record.

[OldChelsea]

too many split loyalty fans at home diminishes the home field advantage.

...as did the opposition supporters (Cubs, Mets, Phillies) who used to turn up by the thousands in RFK days, or the bus-loads pf drunken, non-potty-trained Philly supporters from ca. 2009-11.

But to the larger issue: I think some athletes just find it easier to get their competitive juices going when they're in (theoretically at least) hostile territory.

[dcpatti]

Still it's worse at home, and if it were actually identical then we would still be playing bad at home: normally a teams home record is significantly better than their away record.

Statistically, teams do better at home, but not significantly.  The total splits work out to roughly 43-38 home (or more like 42.833-38.167) /38-43 road, if you take the yearly splits and divide by 30 teams. I only went back 4 years though. Regardless, it's an edge to play at home but not a significant edge, and could still come down to the influence of the double headers and Dusty's Famous "Everybody Gets A Rest Day" lineups which seem to happen  a lot more frequently at home than on the road.

[Ray D]

Statistically, teams do better at home, but not significantly.

I agree but what I meant was that "the difference is statistically significant" (I do believe that to be true) which I concede has a different connotation than "significantly different". Laziness on my part.

[Optics]

I think its more so that we've beaten good teams on the road this year. We took 2/3 from the Dodgers, Rockies, Diamondbacks, Cubs, and Astros all on the road. Conversely at home we lot 2/3 to the Rockies, split the Cubs, and just got smashed in Game 1 by the Dodgers(still took 2/3 from the DBacks at home).

[bluestreak]

Statistically, teams do better at home, but not significantly.  The total splits work out to roughly 43-38 home (or more like 42.833-38.167) /38-43 road, if you take the yearly splits and divide by 30 teams. I only went back 4 years though. Regardless, it's an edge to play at home but not a significant edge, and could still come down to the influence of the double headers and Dusty's Famous "Everybody Gets A Rest Day" lineups which seem to happen  a lot more frequently at home than on the road.

Five games difference over that many games is very likely statistically significant and actually significant. That is, the stats actually represent the reality that teams do play better at home and that this isn’t just statistical noise.
A team that is five games better on the road than at home is playing 10 games better than expected on the road, which is a huge difference. And again probably represents the reality that they are better on the road.