- 2,382
- 254
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2002
CertifiedSW wrote:
Games that the "better" team did not win. Vol.Playoff & Championship Games/Series
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by mben32,
- Start date
- 2,382
- 254
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2002
CertifiedSW wrote:
- 21,948
- 1,377
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2003
Injuries can occur to that better team as well and they end up losing a close one.
I should know.
- 21,948
- 1,377
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2003
Injuries can occur to that better team as well and they end up losing a close one.
I should know.
- 23,634
- 15,064
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
2002 World Series, **%@%$$ Angels.
- 23,634
- 15,064
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
2002 World Series, **%@%$$ Angels.
- 6,617
- 13
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2004
But there are just some certain match ups that cause problems to the "better" team. The first one that comes to mind is the #1 Mavs vs #8 Warriors. Mavs were the obvious better team and could have gone deep but that match up of style and the type of game they play caused problems.
- 6,617
- 13
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2004
But there are just some certain match ups that cause problems to the "better" team. The first one that comes to mind is the #1 Mavs vs #8 Warriors. Mavs were the obvious better team and could have gone deep but that match up of style and the type of game they play caused problems.
- 147,597
- 194,923
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2007
yup
should have won 3 straight national championships.. don't forget getting screwed in 00:
In 2000, Miami was shut out of the BCS National Championship Game. Despite beating Florida State head-to-head and being ranked higher in both human polls, it was the Seminoles that were chosen to challenge the Oklahoma Sooners for the national championship. The Seminoles were also chosen over Washington, who also had one loss and who had handed Miami its only loss early in the season. Washington had been ranked third or fourth in the human polls, behind Miami. The Hurricanes went into the 2001 Nokia Sugar Bowl as the Big East champions and defeated Florida 37-20.
- 147,597
- 194,923
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2007
yup
should have won 3 straight national championships.. don't forget getting screwed in 00:
In 2000, Miami was shut out of the BCS National Championship Game. Despite beating Florida State head-to-head and being ranked higher in both human polls, it was the Seminoles that were chosen to challenge the Oklahoma Sooners for the national championship. The Seminoles were also chosen over Washington, who also had one loss and who had handed Miami its only loss early in the season. Washington had been ranked third or fourth in the human polls, behind Miami. The Hurricanes went into the 2001 Nokia Sugar Bowl as the Big East champions and defeated Florida 37-20.
- 4,058
- 11
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2007
its simple statistics just like every aspect of life...
when you increase the sample size you will get closer to the overall result.
for example if you flip a coin (equal probability) 1 time and it lands heads this does not mean that you will get heads 100% of the time, just as if you flip the coin 4 times and get 3 heads does not mean heads will occur 75% as it does given the sample size of 4. When you flip this coin more and more times and increase your sample size you will get closer and closer to 50% heads and 50% tails as it should be.
In sports this means that if your sample size is 1 (a la NFL playoffs/NCAA tourny) you are most likely to get an end result that is not an accurate depiction of whose the better team. For if one team will usually win 75% of the time and are therefore the better team, they can still lose in this 1 game 25% of the time, which even if they lose would not give an accurate result of which team is better
In a 7 game series (NBA, MLB, etc) you are more likely to get the accurate result, and the team that wins 75% of the time is more likely to win the majority of the games in a 7 game series than just one single game but this still cannot be completely accurate because the team that wins 25% of the time still has a (very slim) chance of winning 4 of the 7 games. However because of this there are probably FAR more examples of the "better" team losing in an NFL playoff game or NCAA tourny than a 7 game NBA series, but it is still possible in either scenarios.
The only way the better team would ALWAYS come out on top (statistically) would be in a 50 game series or some ++%* with an enormous sample size where the better team (the team that has the higher probability to win) will win the majority almost 100% of the time.
I would say in a 7 game series the "better" team should win 90% or so of the time, depending how much better they are... however that is the beauty of playoff time, it doesnt necessarily matter who the better team is, just the team that can win that 1 game or that 7 game series. And if the teams are pretty close in comparison an upset can be very likely given the small sample space, or number of games, and it is still possible even if one team is significantly better than the other especially in a one game scenario such as NCAA tournament.
It also matters if the team that is "inferior" can step up and win playoff games more than better teams, or if one team has a better game plan, but i consider both to be skills themselves imo... and of course refs can often be a factor like the Heat in 06 and Lakers in 02 as well as other incidents...
when you increase the sample size you will get closer to the overall result.
for example if you flip a coin (equal probability) 1 time and it lands heads this does not mean that you will get heads 100% of the time, just as if you flip the coin 4 times and get 3 heads does not mean heads will occur 75% as it does given the sample size of 4. When you flip this coin more and more times and increase your sample size you will get closer and closer to 50% heads and 50% tails as it should be.
In sports this means that if your sample size is 1 (a la NFL playoffs/NCAA tourny) you are most likely to get an end result that is not an accurate depiction of whose the better team. For if one team will usually win 75% of the time and are therefore the better team, they can still lose in this 1 game 25% of the time, which even if they lose would not give an accurate result of which team is better
In a 7 game series (NBA, MLB, etc) you are more likely to get the accurate result, and the team that wins 75% of the time is more likely to win the majority of the games in a 7 game series than just one single game but this still cannot be completely accurate because the team that wins 25% of the time still has a (very slim) chance of winning 4 of the 7 games. However because of this there are probably FAR more examples of the "better" team losing in an NFL playoff game or NCAA tourny than a 7 game NBA series, but it is still possible in either scenarios.
The only way the better team would ALWAYS come out on top (statistically) would be in a 50 game series or some ++%* with an enormous sample size where the better team (the team that has the higher probability to win) will win the majority almost 100% of the time.
I would say in a 7 game series the "better" team should win 90% or so of the time, depending how much better they are... however that is the beauty of playoff time, it doesnt necessarily matter who the better team is, just the team that can win that 1 game or that 7 game series. And if the teams are pretty close in comparison an upset can be very likely given the small sample space, or number of games, and it is still possible even if one team is significantly better than the other especially in a one game scenario such as NCAA tournament.
It also matters if the team that is "inferior" can step up and win playoff games more than better teams, or if one team has a better game plan, but i consider both to be skills themselves imo... and of course refs can often be a factor like the Heat in 06 and Lakers in 02 as well as other incidents...
- 4,058
- 11
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2007
its simple statistics just like every aspect of life...
when you increase the sample size you will get closer to the overall result.
for example if you flip a coin (equal probability) 1 time and it lands heads this does not mean that you will get heads 100% of the time, just as if you flip the coin 4 times and get 3 heads does not mean heads will occur 75% as it does given the sample size of 4. When you flip this coin more and more times and increase your sample size you will get closer and closer to 50% heads and 50% tails as it should be.
In sports this means that if your sample size is 1 (a la NFL playoffs/NCAA tourny) you are most likely to get an end result that is not an accurate depiction of whose the better team. For if one team will usually win 75% of the time and are therefore the better team, they can still lose in this 1 game 25% of the time, which even if they lose would not give an accurate result of which team is better
In a 7 game series (NBA, MLB, etc) you are more likely to get the accurate result, and the team that wins 75% of the time is more likely to win the majority of the games in a 7 game series than just one single game but this still cannot be completely accurate because the team that wins 25% of the time still has a (very slim) chance of winning 4 of the 7 games. However because of this there are probably FAR more examples of the "better" team losing in an NFL playoff game or NCAA tourny than a 7 game NBA series, but it is still possible in either scenarios.
The only way the better team would ALWAYS come out on top (statistically) would be in a 50 game series or some ++%* with an enormous sample size where the better team (the team that has the higher probability to win) will win the majority almost 100% of the time.
I would say in a 7 game series the "better" team should win 90% or so of the time, depending how much better they are... however that is the beauty of playoff time, it doesnt necessarily matter who the better team is, just the team that can win that 1 game or that 7 game series. And if the teams are pretty close in comparison an upset can be very likely given the small sample space, or number of games, and it is still possible even if one team is significantly better than the other especially in a one game scenario such as NCAA tournament.
It also matters if the team that is "inferior" can step up and win playoff games more than better teams, or if one team has a better game plan, but i consider both to be skills themselves imo... and of course refs can often be a factor like the Heat in 06 and Lakers in 02 as well as other incidents...
when you increase the sample size you will get closer to the overall result.
for example if you flip a coin (equal probability) 1 time and it lands heads this does not mean that you will get heads 100% of the time, just as if you flip the coin 4 times and get 3 heads does not mean heads will occur 75% as it does given the sample size of 4. When you flip this coin more and more times and increase your sample size you will get closer and closer to 50% heads and 50% tails as it should be.
In sports this means that if your sample size is 1 (a la NFL playoffs/NCAA tourny) you are most likely to get an end result that is not an accurate depiction of whose the better team. For if one team will usually win 75% of the time and are therefore the better team, they can still lose in this 1 game 25% of the time, which even if they lose would not give an accurate result of which team is better
In a 7 game series (NBA, MLB, etc) you are more likely to get the accurate result, and the team that wins 75% of the time is more likely to win the majority of the games in a 7 game series than just one single game but this still cannot be completely accurate because the team that wins 25% of the time still has a (very slim) chance of winning 4 of the 7 games. However because of this there are probably FAR more examples of the "better" team losing in an NFL playoff game or NCAA tourny than a 7 game NBA series, but it is still possible in either scenarios.
The only way the better team would ALWAYS come out on top (statistically) would be in a 50 game series or some ++%* with an enormous sample size where the better team (the team that has the higher probability to win) will win the majority almost 100% of the time.
I would say in a 7 game series the "better" team should win 90% or so of the time, depending how much better they are... however that is the beauty of playoff time, it doesnt necessarily matter who the better team is, just the team that can win that 1 game or that 7 game series. And if the teams are pretty close in comparison an upset can be very likely given the small sample space, or number of games, and it is still possible even if one team is significantly better than the other especially in a one game scenario such as NCAA tournament.
It also matters if the team that is "inferior" can step up and win playoff games more than better teams, or if one team has a better game plan, but i consider both to be skills themselves imo... and of course refs can often be a factor like the Heat in 06 and Lakers in 02 as well as other incidents...
- 11,243
- 5,443
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2006
portland vs la 2000 western conf finals, that game 7 still gets me hot
- 11,243
- 5,443
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2006
portland vs la 2000 western conf finals, that game 7 still gets me hot
- 147,597
- 194,923
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2007
no question the buckeye defense was legit, but do you remember that hurricanes roster? and did you watch the video i posted?
[h3]Offense[/h3]
- QB- Ken Dorsey, Derrick Crudup
- FB- Kyle Cobia, Quadtrine Hill
- RB- Willis McGahee, Jarrett Payton, Frank Gore
- WR- Andre Johnson, Jason Geathers
- WR- Kevin Beard, Ethenic Sands
- TE- Kellen Winslow II, David Williams
- LT- Carlos Joseph, Tony Tella
- LG- Sherko Haji-Rasouli, Joe McGrath
- C- Brett Romberg. Joel Rodriguez
- RG- Ed Wilkins, Chris Myers
- RT- Vernon Carey , Rashad Butler
- DE- Andrew Williams, Jamaal Green
- DT- Matt Walters, Santonio Thomas
- DT- William Joseph, Vince Wilfork
- DE- Jerome McDougle, Cornelius Green
- WLB- .J. Williams, Jerrel Weaver
- MLB- Jonathan Vilma, Leon Williams
- SLB- Howard Clark, Rocky McIntosh
- CB- Al Marshall, Jean Leone
- CB- Kelly Jennings, Antrel Rolle
- SS- Maurice Sikes, Marcus Maxey
- FS- Sean Taylor, James Scott
- 147,597
- 194,923
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2007
no question the buckeye defense was legit, but do you remember that hurricanes roster? and did you watch the video i posted?
[h3]Offense[/h3]
- QB- Ken Dorsey, Derrick Crudup
- FB- Kyle Cobia, Quadtrine Hill
- RB- Willis McGahee, Jarrett Payton, Frank Gore
- WR- Andre Johnson, Jason Geathers
- WR- Kevin Beard, Ethenic Sands
- TE- Kellen Winslow II, David Williams
- LT- Carlos Joseph, Tony Tella
- LG- Sherko Haji-Rasouli, Joe McGrath
- C- Brett Romberg. Joel Rodriguez
- RG- Ed Wilkins, Chris Myers
- RT- Vernon Carey , Rashad Butler
- DE- Andrew Williams, Jamaal Green
- DT- Matt Walters, Santonio Thomas
- DT- William Joseph, Vince Wilfork
- DE- Jerome McDougle, Cornelius Green
- WLB- .J. Williams, Jerrel Weaver
- MLB- Jonathan Vilma, Leon Williams
- SLB- Howard Clark, Rocky McIntosh
- CB- Al Marshall, Jean Leone
- CB- Kelly Jennings, Antrel Rolle
- SS- Maurice Sikes, Marcus Maxey
- FS- Sean Taylor, James Scott
- 4,207
- 7,102
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2007
2010 nba finals
lakers beat the slightly better boston celtics
lakers beat the slightly better boston celtics
- 4,207
- 7,102
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2007
2010 nba finals
lakers beat the slightly better boston celtics
lakers beat the slightly better boston celtics
- 12,536
- 39
- Joined
- May 5, 2009
Originally Posted by dland24
by laughing you're about to start a riot, my friend.
- 12,536
- 39
- Joined
- May 5, 2009
Originally Posted by dland24
by laughing you're about to start a riot, my friend.
- 28,101
- 2,625
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2002
Miami vs Ohio State ncaa football title game back in the 00's
memphis vs kansas ncaa 08 title game
grizzlies vs okc, this years playoffs :/
memphis vs kansas ncaa 08 title game
grizzlies vs okc, this years playoffs :/
- 28,101
- 2,625
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2002
Miami vs Ohio State ncaa football title game back in the 00's
memphis vs kansas ncaa 08 title game
grizzlies vs okc, this years playoffs :/
memphis vs kansas ncaa 08 title game
grizzlies vs okc, this years playoffs :/
- 6,399
- 1,099
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2004
Wrong.
1994 NBA first round.
Seattle SuperSonics (63-19) vs Denver Nuggets (42-40)
We lost 3-2 after being up 2-0. Such a sad day for me as a kid.
- 6,399
- 1,099
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2004
Wrong.
1994 NBA first round.
Seattle SuperSonics (63-19) vs Denver Nuggets (42-40)
We lost 3-2 after being up 2-0. Such a sad day for me as a kid.
- 3,995
- 44
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2004
Pretty much.