The Denver Nuggets have the biggest home advantage in North American pro sports, according to this graph.

如下圖所示，丹佛掘金隊擁有北美職業體育聯盟中最顯著的主場優勢。

[–]NetsLanaRhoades- 167 指標 10小時前

In 12/13 they were 39-3 at home and 19-22 on the road

在2012-13賽季，掘金主場39勝3負，客場19勝22負。

[–]HoodedNinj4 91 指標 10小時前

42 home games, no wonder.

哎呦我去，42場主場比賽呢，難怪掘金有那麼大主場優勢呢。（實爲41主41客）

[–]oman1943 193 指標 9小時前

All my NY teams virtually at the bottom for each oof

靠，我所有的紐約主隊都排在各聯盟榜單末尾呢。

[–]KnicksCoryWithAnE 117 指標 9小時前

People love to put on a show at the Garden at our expense

尼克斯球迷：大傢伙都願意在麥迪遜花園廣場拿出真本事表演一番，代價就是我們的苦與痛。

[–]oman1943 77 指標 8小時前

Everyone but the Knicks

嗯，大傢伙都願意得瑟一下，除了尼克斯球員自己。

[–]WarriorsRampanTThirteen 72 指標 9小時前

Makes sense in a way. NY is an expensive city, and a transplant heavy city. So you probably get a lot more corporate events/tickets and fans of the visiting team coming than some other places.

勇士球迷：某種程度上是有道理。紐約是一個物價高昂的城市，也是一個交通樞紐。所以麥迪遜可能有比其他任何地方都多的企業活動/員工票，以及來到紐約看球的客場球隊球迷。

[–]archronin 131 指標 10小時前

Every sport, Denver is high up in the ranks. Mountain high, cannabis high...competition isn’t used to it.

丹佛在每一項運動中都高居主場優勢榜前列。這地兒山高，大X麻多，對手們不習慣呀！

[–]HoodedNinj4 80 指標 10小時前

Impact of the schedule, with how often there used to be 4 games in 5 nights and 3 games in 4 nights in addition to the back to back games. Denver and Utah both get the East and West Coast teams at the start or end of these stretches on the opposite coast on their way back home to their own timezone/division.

我認爲還有賽程的影響，以前，除了各種背靠背的比賽，還有各種5天4賽或者4天3賽。掘金和爵士主場都會在這幾場連續比賽的開頭或結尾迎戰西海岸的球隊，那些西海岸的球隊正處在回到自己的時區/分區的旅途中，卻要在完全相反的海岸打一場客場。

Guys legs are either dead or coaches pull them early instead of pushing them heavy minutes for a comeback when getting out of the week stable is the main priority.

要麼就是球員們的腿已經不堪重負，要麼就是教練們早早地偃旗息鼓而不是讓球員們拼命爭勝，因爲到了那會兒，趕緊結束這周的賽程纔是大家的心頭之重。

You add that on to the altitude that some guys just can't adjust to quickly and I'm surprised a Superstar hasn't decided to sign up for a decade of 50 win seasons and footage of how much crisper they look on the court than their opponents.

再加上丹佛和猶他還有海拔的影響，導致對手一時半會兒適應不過來……那說到這我就奇怪了，掘金和爵士常年50勝，而且無數視頻都顯示他們的球員在場上比對手更活力四射，那爲啥沒有超巨投入其麾下呢？

[–]CelticsHauntedFrigateBird[S] 767 指標 11小時前

Not really surprised, considering elevation. Denver is near the top of every list for each sport.

考慮到丹佛的海拔，我倒不太驚訝。丹佛的運動隊幾乎在每個體育聯盟的榜單上都排第一呢。

[–]Nuggetsjdorje 152 指標 9小時前

Broncos are about 20% of the way down the list, behind ~all of the NBA teams but ahead of all the other NFL teams. NBA has a much higher home-court advantage than other sports (and you could condense your graph by sport to show this).

The Rockies are also at the top of MLB, but the Avalanche are not at the top of hockey.

丹佛野馬隊（NFL）排在榜單的前20％左右，落後於所有NBA球隊，但排在所有其他NFL球隊之前。相比其他聯盟，NBA的主場優勢顯著得多（按體育項目把這張圖壓扁一下就能看出來啦）。

科羅拉多洛基隊的主場優勢也位列MLB球隊之首，不過在冰球方面，科羅拉多雪崩隊沒有排在第一。

[–][TOR] Dell CurryModernPoultry 240 指標 9小時前*

I feel like it hurts the Rockies. The elevation is great for hitters and attracting them and gearing their offense towards the long ball but its accepted in the baseball community that a pitcher getting sent to Coors Field is like getting sent to the Gulag. Attracting pitching talent is really tough for them

我覺得這種主場優勢對洛基隊來說其實是劣勢。丹佛的海拔高度對於擊球手來說是有利的，球隊能吸引來優秀的擊球手，而在這種環境中，洛基隊也會傾向於將進攻重心放在打長球上。但是在棒球領域有一種公認的說法是：做客庫爾斯球場（洛基隊主場）的投球手就像被流放到了前蘇聯的勞改營。吸引具有投球天賦的球員真的很難。

[–]Supersonicsgardeningwithciscoe 125 指標 9小時前

rockies have had some insanely good hitters in their history

it helps with HRs but what coors field really does is pad a players doubles and triples because the field is really big and rolls around for a long time before it gets chased down. its actual homer walls are pretty far compared to boston or new yorks stadiums

洛基隊史有不少極其出色的擊球手。

容易打出全壘打，但是庫爾斯球場真正的問題在於一個球員很難完成二壘安打或者三壘安打，因爲場地實在太大了，球員在上壘之前要跑好長時間。和紐約或者波士頓的棒球場館比起來，庫爾斯球場的本壘牆相當遠。

[–]BucksBanjoStory 162 指標 7小時前

It's insane that baseball has never standardized their field, tbh.

說實話，棒球從來都沒有將球場標準化，真的不可理喻。

[–]PacersThe_DoubleHelix 365 指標 9小時前

Very interesting that baseball is the only sport where the field actually changes with each stadium, yet still has the least significant home field advantage.

非常有趣的一點是，棒球是唯一一種其場地會根據各個球館的不同而改變的運動，然而主場優勢的影響程度卻還是最小的。

[–]WarriorsRampanTThirteen 47 指標 9小時前*

I wonder why the NBA has such a massive home court advantage compared to other sports. It has got to be from refereeing right? Home team tends to get more calls? And unlike other sports, foul calls in basketball lead directly to points, while in football they gain you yards and hockey they give you a powerplay.

勇士球迷：我想知道，爲什麼和其他體育項目比起來，NBA的主場優勢如此明顯？肯定是因爲裁判對吧？因爲主場球隊可以得到更多的哨子？不像其他體育項目，籃球中的犯規可以直接帶來得分，而在橄欖球和冰球中只是分別帶來碼數和一個回合的人數優勢。

I'm surprised the MLB has the lowest home field advantage. You would think in the sport where the fields themselves are actually different sizes and have different properties, there would be the greatest rather than smallest home field advantage. I guess that speaks more to the parity of the game of baseball compared to basketball. Basketball is just so star driven compared to other sports.

我有點驚訝MLB的主場優勢是四大聯盟中最低的。棒球每個場館都規格不同，特點也不同，所以按正常邏輯來說，棒球的主場優勢應該是最明顯而非最小的啊。我想，這更加說明了棒球運動相比籃球運動體現出的均衡性。和其他運動項目比起來，籃球的球星主導因素實在太明顯了。

Like Mike Trout has been the undisputed best player in the league for the better part of a decade and made the playoffs once. Can you imagine a Lebron James team from 2008 to 2015 making the playoffs once?

洛杉磯天使隊的邁克-特勞特在十年的大部分時間裏一直是職棒聯盟中無可爭議的最佳球員，但是隻打進過一次季後賽。你敢想象勒布朗-詹姆斯在2008到2015期間只帶隊打進過一次季後賽嗎？

[–][TOR] Donyell MarshallPSChris33 137 指標 9小時前

Baseball isn't subject to aerobic limitations (such as fatigue) that can vary on playing conditions like basketball and football. The reason baseball is so low in general on the HFA scale is because it has the most variance and luck involved on a game by game basis of any sport. Look at how many 100+ win teams go out every year in the division series without a whimper in the small sample size death that is the MLB playoffs.

棒球不受有氧限制（如疲勞）的影響，而這些限制因在籃球和足球中會隨着比賽條件的變化而不同。棒球的主場優勢很微小主要是因爲和所有其他體育項目相比，棒球比賽受變數和運氣的影響最大。你可以看看每年有多少拿到100+勝場的球隊在分區系列賽中出局吧，MLB的季後賽樣本數實在太小，一不小心就容易徹底歇菜。

As far as differing dimensions go... well, the short RF porch at Yankee stadium might be a laughable joke, but hey, nothing preventing an opposing player from hitting one there, so there's really no advantage in that manner on a game by game basis.

至於說各場館本壘牆的遠近不同……嗯，洋基體育場右外野的短門廊可能是個天大的笑話，不過啊，這所謂的優勢也是雙方球隊都具有的啊，也沒人攔着做客的球隊打到位置啊。所以，就從單場比賽來看，場館基礎設施真的沒啥影響。

[–]Supersonicsgardeningwithciscoe 121 指標 7小時前

baseballs a lot older than basketball and old stadiums had to be built in certain ways because they were either multipurpose arenas or due to physical limitations (like the green monster)

棒球比籃球的歷史久遠多了，過去的老場館不得不按照某種方式建造，因爲它們當初要麼會被用於不同場合，要麼就是受到物理條件的限制（比如波士頓紅襪隊主場那11.3米高的左外野牆）。

i think it adds to the character of the game, gives a true home field advantages as fielders know how to play their stadium better than others

most modern made ballparks are pretty bland

我覺得這反倒增加了比賽的特別之處，創造了真正的“主場優勢”，因爲主場球員們比其他人都更瞭解自家場地。

大多數現代化球場是比較千篇一律的。

[–]NetsMimogger 79 指標 8小時前

This podcast from freakonomics about it was pretty interesting

這篇來自魔鬼經濟學的文章很有意思：

http://freakonomics.com/2011/12/18/football-freakonomics-how-advantageous-is-home-field-advantage-and-why/

Summary is

Apparently, when the crowd sits closer to the field, the officials are more susceptible to getting caught up in the home-crowd emotion.

總結起來就是：

當觀衆坐在離球場很近的位置時，場上的球員們更容易受到主場觀衆情緒的感染。