Observational studyPloS one2026
Playing surface, match outcomes, and formation usage patterns in Major League Soccer.
Observational study in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Playing surface is a routine contextual factor in professional football, yet its association with tactical behavior and match outcomes remains unclear. The aim of this retrospective observational study was to examine whether playing surface is associated with starting formation, performance metrics, and match outcomes in professional football. Using 6,764 team-match observations from 3,383 Major League Soccer (MLS) matches (2017-2024; 6,761 team-match observations with identifiable surface), this study evaluated how surface type (grass, turf, hybrid) is associated with formation usage, performance metrics, and match outcomes. Team-level data were analyzed using chi-square tests, ANOVA, and logistic regression models incorporating surface type, match location, and their interaction. Surface type was not significantly associated with match outcomes (χ²(4) = 7.71, p = 0.103; Cramer's V = 0.034), suggesting similar competitive outcomes across modern playing surfaces. However, differences in league-wide formation distributions and aspects of attacking performance were observed across surface categories. Formation usage varied significantly by surface (χ², p < 0.001), with the 4-3-3 more common on grass and the 4-2-3-1 more prevalent on turf. Modest differences in goal scoring were observed, while possession remained largely unchanged. Home advantage was strong overall and did not differ significantly between grass and turf; a significant hybrid-by-location interaction was observed, although the hybrid category represented a single venue and should not be generalized. These findings indicate that playing surface was not meaningfully associated with competitive outcomes but was associated with differences in league-wide formation distributions and selected performance metrics. Because home surface is closely tied to club identity and the observational design cannot establish tactical adaptation, formation findings should be interpreted as descriptive associations rather than evidence that teams changed formations in response to surface conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.