Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

2021 Pac 12 Tournament Thread

UCLA in the midst of a total meltdown against pressure from Oregon.
 
cmgoods said:
I also ran the different bracket scenarios, if we win and get the 3 seed. If we lose and ASU beats Utah and Oregon State loses to Oregon, we would face ASU as the 5th seed.



View attachment 43448
View attachment 43449
Click to expand...
Curious who everyone would like to face (assuming chalk to the semis). I'd much rather face USC than Oregon or UCLA but that comes from watching mostly Colorado games. I haven't watched many other games this year to see those teams outside of playing CU. I'd least like to play Oregon because they seem to be clicking. Altman tends to have his teams peak at the right time.
 
dwyermj said:
Curious who everyone would like to face (assuming chalk to the semis). I'd much rather face USC than Oregon or UCLA but that comes from watching mostly Colorado games. I haven't watched many other games this year to see those teams outside of playing CU. I'd least like to play Oregon because they seem to be clicking. Altman tends to have his teams peak at the right time.
Click to expand...
At this point, we've beat USC twice, I'd assume they may have our number the third time. Even though we own Enfield. I'd rather have Oregon on the other side of the bracket with USC and maybe pick UCLA to play on our side. Which is honestly surprising to say.
 
dwyermj said:
Curious who everyone would like to face (assuming chalk to the semis). I'd much rather face USC than Oregon or UCLA but that comes from watching mostly Colorado games. I haven't watched many other games this year to see those teams outside of playing CU. I'd least like to play Oregon because they seem to be clicking. Altman tends to have his teams peak at the right time.
Click to expand...

I think we match up best with Oregon. They don't have anyone who can guard McKinley and Parquet, Schwarz, Walker, and da Silva can frustrate Duarte. However, if USC continues to play below their talent, I'd prefer to play them.
 
torerobuff said:
It's really difficult to beat quality opponents 3 times in the same season, so I'd like to avoid USC. On the flip side, it would also be so so so satisfying to beat Andy Enfield 3 times.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is hard to beat a quality opponent three times in a season, but it is no harder to beat a quality opponent the third time as it is the first two, if that makes sense.

In other words, if CU is a (hypothetical) coin flip to beat USC, the probability that they win all three times is 12.5%. However, the probability that CU wins the third time is still a coin flip (in this hypothetical), regardless of the outcome of the first two games.

The reason people buy this myth is confirmation bias. It seems like it would be harder to beat a team for the third time, so we tend to notice the evidence that supports that belief..
 
NWD Buff said:
Yes, it is hard to beat a quality opponent three times in a season, but it is no harder to beat a quality opponent the third time as it is the first two, if that makes sense.

In other words, if CU is a (hypothetical) coin flip to beat USC, the probability that they win all three times is 12.5%. However, the probability that CU wins the third time is still a coin flip (in this hypothetical), regardless of the outcome of the first two games.

The reason people buy this myth is confirmation bias. It seems like it would be harder to beat a team for the third time, so we tend to notice the evidence that supports that belief..
Click to expand...
Basketball is not a roulette wheel. There is a lot more to why it is hard to beat a team 3 times than the statistical analysis you've provided.
 
NWD Buff said:
Yes, it is hard to beat a quality opponent three times in a season, but it is no harder to beat a quality opponent the third time as it is the first two, if that makes sense.

In other words, if CU is a (hypothetical) coin flip to beat USC, the probability that they win all three times is 12.5%. However, the probability that CU wins the third time is still a coin flip (in this hypothetical), regardless of the outcome of the first two games.

The reason people buy this myth is confirmation bias. It seems like it would be harder to beat a team for the third time, so we tend to notice the evidence that supports that belief..
Click to expand...

statistically speaking, that's true...but you're taking emotion out of it
 
torerobuff said:
Basketball is not a roulette wheel. There is a lot more to why it is hard to beat a team 3 times than the statistical analysis you've provided.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is hard to beat a team three times, but the odds of winning the third time are not impacted by the outcomes of the other two. I would welcome any statistics that prove otherwise.
Zachsquatch said:
statistically speaking, that's true...but you're taking emotion out of it
Click to expand...
I would argue that the emotion of playing in your conference tournament trumps the revenge factor. I would further argue that the "emotional" factor favors the team that won the first two times. You know if a team beats has beat you soundly the first two times you played, and that becomes a factor as a game wears on.
 
This is from a 2017 article:

The subset of the data we're most interested in, though, is the 40 games where the 2-0 team is better than its opponent by a margin of fewer than 50 rungs on the KenPom ladder. Those are the times where—if it is actually more difficult to beat an opponent three times—one would expect to see the underdog win on a somewhat regular basis. Maybe not 50 percent of the time, but at least 25 percent, right?

Well, that's not what the numbers show.

In those 40 games, the 2-0 team won the third game 85 percent of the time. In fact, the 2-0 team was almost twice as likely to win the third game by a larger margin than its first two wins (11 times) than lose the third game (six times)—including North Carolina's 17-point win over Syracuse in last year's national semifinals.

It's already a small sample size, but if we cut out 2012 and 2013 and just focus on the last three years, the 2-0 teams in those "evenly matched" battles went 21-2, winning by an average margin of 10.8 points.

Maybe it's more balanced in the NFL, but when college basketball teams beat an opponent twice in one season, they're also going to win the third game about nine out of 10 times. Keep that in mind when filling out those conference tournament brackets next month.
Click to expand...

Full article here
 
NWD Buff said:
Yes, it is hard to beat a team three times, but the odds of winning the third time are not impacted by the outcomes of the other two. I would welcome any statistics that prove otherwise.

I would argue that the emotion of playing in your conference tournament trumps the revenge factor. I would further argue that the "emotional" factor favors the team that won the first two times. You know if a team beats has beat you soundly the first two times you played, and that becomes a factor as a game wears on.
Click to expand...
There are not statistical analyses to account for coaching adjustments, to account for if Evan Mobley is feeling a little more active today and is going to play better because of it, to account for the fact that Eli Parquet has figured out how to disrupt the rhythm of a ball handler after playing against him for 2 whole games, to account for if some other random player's girlfriend broke up with him and he's gonna play like ****. We all know how to multiply 50% by itself 3 times. It is not an equation that can be solved.
 
torerobuff said:
There are not statistical analyses to account for coaching adjustments, to account for if Evan Mobley is feeling a little more active today and is going to play better because of it, to account for the fact that Eli Parquet has figured out how to disrupt the rhythm of a ball handler after playing against him for 2 whole games, to account for if some other random player's girlfriend broke up with him and he's gonna play like ****. We all know how to multiply 50% by itself 3 times. It is not an equation that can be solved.
Click to expand...
Yup, those are just a few of the myriad factors that impact the likelihood of a win. All of those factors still exist if the teams split in the regular season. And they also exist for the team that won the first two times.

I simply do not believe - and there is plenty of proof on my side - that it is more difficult to beat a quality team a third time than the other two times. It is difficult to beat a quality team every time.

If you say that CU will have trouble against USC despite the fact that they handled them during the season - because USC is still a good team -then that is a valid statement.

Whereas, if you say that CU sill have trouble against USC because they beat them twice in the regular season, that statement is based upon multiple logical fallacies.

Do you think CU is more likely to win against UCLA or USC at this point?
 
NWD Buff said:
I simply do not believe - and there is plenty of proof on my side - that it is more difficult to beat a quality team a third time than the other two times. It is difficult to beat a quality team every time.



Do you think CU is more likely to win against UCLA or USC at this point?
Click to expand...
A 40 game sample size is not "plenty of proof". But yes, it is difficult to beat a quality team every time, it is more difficult to beat them 3 times, because each time is difficult.

I have no idea if CU is more likely to win against either team. I would take more joy in CU beating USC a third time, I have no reason to really strongly dislike UCLA and Cronin at this point.
 
torerobuff said:
A 40 game sample size is not "plenty of proof". But yes, it is difficult to beat a quality team every time, it is more difficult to beat them 3 times, because each time is difficult.

I have no idea if CU is more likely to win against either team. I would take more joy in CU beating USC a third time, I have no reason to really strongly dislike UCLA and Cronin at this point.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's any more difficult, though. I'd certainly rather play a team I'd beaten twice instead of a team I'd lost to twice. Probably means my team matches up well and probably also has the psychological advantage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top