It's just one those old wife's tales we have passed down over the years. The actual numbers tell a verry different story.
Last edited:
The myth of beating a team three times is hard
- Thread starter University-6
- Start date
If youre good enough to beat them twice youre good enough to beat them three times
And if we have the same effort that we had against Illinois, its going to be tough for Tennessee to win.
The biggest difference here is that in all three contests Tenn. was/will be the higher ranked team. I think we can do it, as long as we defend and don’t just have a terrible night shooting threes. The key in the first 2 games was getting out to a good start.
But the obvious difference is that in nearly all of those cases the team that won three times was simply way better and heavily favored over the other team.
Whereas what’s crazy about our situation is that we have a chance to go 3-0 against a team that’s higher seeded and was favored in those games. Please tell me how many times that ever happened before. Can you name even one ever?
Whereas what’s crazy about our situation is that we have a chance to go 3-0 against a team that’s higher seeded and was favored in those games. Please tell me how many times that ever happened before. Can you name even one ever?
I'll get back with you this Friday night and answer your question. There will be one then.
As a Statistician, I think you have to look deeper than that overall summary.
Some, maybe a lot, of those 3 game situations were where the 1 team was much better than the other team. So in those games, naturally the team that is a lot better will also win the 3rd game too.
There is also the factor of this game being in the NCAA-T, where "it means more", much more. How does that factor in?
Lastly, games in the NCAA-T or NIT are more comparable because both teams were good enough to make it that far (it's not like playing a team in your conference tournament for the 3rd time (1 seed vs 8 seed).
So, I think a better statistic would be, what is the W-L % of teams playing for a 3rd time in the NCAA-T (or NIT) where it was 2-0 going into that game.
Some, maybe a lot, of those 3 game situations were where the 1 team was much better than the other team. So in those games, naturally the team that is a lot better will also win the 3rd game too.
There is also the factor of this game being in the NCAA-T, where "it means more", much more. How does that factor in?
Lastly, games in the NCAA-T or NIT are more comparable because both teams were good enough to make it that far (it's not like playing a team in your conference tournament for the 3rd time (1 seed vs 8 seed).
So, I think a better statistic would be, what is the W-L % of teams playing for a 3rd time in the NCAA-T (or NIT) where it was 2-0 going into that game.
We were smashed by bama 3x. If I’m pope I point that outIt's just of those old wife's tales we have passed down over the years. The actual numbers tell a verry different story.
The radio stations here in TN are saying that Butler made a comment after the game last night about “We are beating UT.”
I agree with all of that, but that's not the narrative. The statement has always been it's hard to win three times. No stipulations placed, just that.
Last edited:
Would it really be 3x? I mean our team is far different. There may be some mentality to shut brea down but with butler it’s a completely different team. I don’t recall him playing UT at least he wasn’t healthy. We have changed a lot UT is the same. I doubt they miss shots this time
Yes, we know you would. 😉
If he did, he did. If you have to see that to get motivated, you already have problems.
Forget the statistics.
Basketball is a game of match-ups. Tennessee has a higher ranking than Kentucky overall because they match up better with lots of teams, based on their defensive intensity and guard play.
But Kentucky has beaten Tennessee twice because Kentucky's ability to score and to counter Tennessee's guards with Butler and Oweh mean the Cats are a difficult match-up for Tennessee. Kentucky also goes deeper with players capable of scoring, even with Jaxson Robinson out.
Tennessee is favored because of overall record. But given how Kentucky matches up with them, It's close to a toss-up game.
Kentucky fans should be optimistic: The match-ups and overall team dynamics that led to the first two wins still exist.
Basketball is a game of match-ups. Tennessee has a higher ranking than Kentucky overall because they match up better with lots of teams, based on their defensive intensity and guard play.
But Kentucky has beaten Tennessee twice because Kentucky's ability to score and to counter Tennessee's guards with Butler and Oweh mean the Cats are a difficult match-up for Tennessee. Kentucky also goes deeper with players capable of scoring, even with Jaxson Robinson out.
Tennessee is favored because of overall record. But given how Kentucky matches up with them, It's close to a toss-up game.
Kentucky fans should be optimistic: The match-ups and overall team dynamics that led to the first two wins still exist.
Last edited:
Why not use it to show dominating a team 3x is possible? They are going to hear how hard it is all week point out a legit scenario they are familiar with. And I looked I mean they have seen us with a full butler and we are a different team with him. There is something about the matchup that doesn’t favor UT.
Our team plays with zero fear. Our fan base could learn a lesson from them. We're winning this one. and then we're winning the next one and going to the Final Four.
Remember the year we had to play LSU FOUR times...?It's just of those old wife's tales we have passed down over the years. The actual numbers tell a verry different story.
It’s going to be a tough game as we know, I would feel more confident if JR were playing but another factor in this is the venue. So many times we’ve heard how shooting is affected by these nfl dome stadiums with depth perception, could come down to who shoots the 3 better. I do think Carr and staying out of foul trouble for butler and OO will be a deciding factor as well.
Somebody like KenPom who has all the data could run: What is the expected win% given the ratings of the teams playing each of those games vs the actual win%. Look at Kentucky vs Tennessee, our respective ratings on KenPom, we probably would have like a 40% chance to win this game. Look across all the games played, does the team who won the first 2 win more or less often than would be expected?
That stat is interesting, in my experiences as a player in high school, the third time we played the same team, we lost most of the time after winning the first two. The key word here is it's hard to beat a GOOD team three times in a season, I think we can, we just have to go out and do it. Tennessee knows we can to too, although like someone said earlier, I wish we had Jaxon Robinson available. Our players believe we can beat them again, and we match up well with Tennessee. I like the way we are playing, and our defense is looking pretty good. Also, Chandler is coming around and the player rotation seems to be paying off just at the right time.
Last edited:
Im curious. What did Jaxon Robinson bring that this team doesn’t have? He’s soft and not a very good defender. Our team defense has been better since he went out. Robinson can fill it up but what’s the deal here between pope and Robinson?
Statistically, it is hard to beat a pick-em opponent a third time. When the matchup is considered pick-em, the odds are that multiple games will produce a 50% win rate for each team. Otherwise, it is not Pick-em.
You can argue that Ky is the much better team or they have a distinct advantage and that is why they should win. But, that doesn’t appear to be the case.
You can argue that Ky is the much better team or they have a distinct advantage and that is why they should win. But, that doesn’t appear to be the case.
Another scorer, experience, size, his defense might have improved to, there were some games when I thought he did play good defense. Having him could only make us better. I don't know what the deal was there, I noticed it last night too, maybe it was nothing.
My guess is something very simple...
Pope was on the side of Jaxson's casted arm, so he probably wasn't going to launch into into him like he did with the other players/coaches. Considering Pope said Jax has also been so engaged during games that he even pointed something out Pope hadn't noticed. So, no need to try to read into something that isn't there.
I've always thought it was implied: it's hard to beat a good team 3 times. I never got the feeling from anyone talking about this, ever, that the 3rd game is harder just because it's the third game.
Just look at the NBA where the playoffs are series, it's hard for even the best teams to sweep their way to a championship.
In fact, only 27% of first rounds are sweeps, and in the finals that drops to 12%. I think when considering the team is at least in your periphery talent wise, it definitely is harder to win 3-4 times in a row without dropping a game.
When we look at UT, they have the better resume, beating Bama, Texas, Georgia who we couldn't beat, and lost fewer conference and total games. They are good. If you don't think we have a good chance to lose this, I'm not sure what planet you're on. This is going to be one tough game, with all the marbles on the line.
They don’t have the better resume, I don’t care who you lost to, who can you can beat?
UK beat Duke, Florida, TN twice, Gonzaga - 3 of those games away from Rupp
TN beat Ala at home, Auburn in SEC tourney (lost at Auburn), split with Florida
I know what you mean, but the thought of this makes me laugh.
"Alright guys, remember how Bama kicked our butts three straight times? How gosh darn bad we played in that last game despite it being hard to lose to the same team three times in one year? Just do the reverse of that this game and we'll be fine."
We have better wins I agree, but you still have to factor in the head scratching losses... Some of those were without before we were really banged up too. Interesting that my post was entirely about how winning 3 times in a row against good teams was a tough thing for even the best teams to do, and yet you focused on that one tidbit.
It’s a myth usually thrown around by the team that loses game 3 after winning first 2
I don’t think UK could beat Bama if they played 5 times in a season, bad matchup
Beating TN again is not some insurmountable obstacle
Good matchup for UK
They don’t park shooters in corners and spread court, their main shooters come off curls, Ziegler penetrates to pass first not score he is 5’9”
Their best standstill shooter is the Euro
Tn defense is predicated on bodying up but ball movement and spreading the court helps defuse their D.
Not saying UK will win but like the matchup, Illinois was a great matchup
I don’t think UK could beat Bama if they played 5 times in a season, bad matchup
Beating TN again is not some insurmountable obstacle
Good matchup for UK
They don’t park shooters in corners and spread court, their main shooters come off curls, Ziegler penetrates to pass first not score he is 5’9”
Their best standstill shooter is the Euro
Tn defense is predicated on bodying up but ball movement and spreading the court helps defuse their D.
Not saying UK will win but like the matchup, Illinois was a great matchup
Those losses, like Texas and OSU, certainly surprised Big Blue Nation but they weren't really bad losses since Texas made tournament and OSU was one of the 1st five out. It is likely that any team whose worst loss is a better team than OSU is a #1 or #2 seed.
ps: that was me telling people on Youtube about the "deep eye contact" line. It's still funny!
I think the most recent Kentucky example that has people worried is 2019 Auburn Kentucky Elite 8
I used to use Ken Pomeroy's game data 20 years ago when I was running my computer generated algorithm for ranking all 300+ teams.
My honest feeling on this is............it doesn't matter.
My feeling on whether we win Friday would be the same if we went 0-2, 1-1 or 2-0 previously vs them.
On Kenpom we are currently a 4 point underdog. They win about 35% of the time. Some here suggest it should be closer to 2. They win 43% of the time.
Lets just saying it's 40/60 here IMO
My feeling on whether we win Friday would be the same if we went 0-2, 1-1 or 2-0 previously vs them.
On Kenpom we are currently a 4 point underdog. They win about 35% of the time. Some here suggest it should be closer to 2. They win 43% of the time.
Lets just saying it's 40/60 here IMO
In Game 1 (@ UT) we had healthy Robinson, but played without BOTH Butler and Carr.
In Game 2 (@ UK) we had Butler back, and a not-himself-yet Carr, but no Robinson.
I do think UT is just a good matchup for us. AND I think Pope focusing on not letting Lanier getting open looks from 3 is key.
Sure Ziegler and Gainey and Milicic and even Mashack can get hot from 3, but you have to give up something, to take away something else. Those 4 make 32.6%, 30.3%, 32.2, 7 36.4% of their 3's respectively. So other than Lanier, only Mashack, who just attempts 1.5/gm makes > 1/3 of his 3's. Lanier has made more than any 2 others combined, and has made more than the entire team combined minus Ziegler. Also UT is not deep, only playing 7 guys (they do have an 8th guy that plays some, but probably not in this game unless they get 2 guards in foul trouble). I think fouls could be a big factor in this game, with neither team terribly deep, but especially if either Zeigler or Butler gets into foul trouble.
Should we win, I think Houston may be a bad matchup for us, because of how well they rebound.
In Game 2 (@ UK) we had Butler back, and a not-himself-yet Carr, but no Robinson.
I do think UT is just a good matchup for us. AND I think Pope focusing on not letting Lanier getting open looks from 3 is key.
Sure Ziegler and Gainey and Milicic and even Mashack can get hot from 3, but you have to give up something, to take away something else. Those 4 make 32.6%, 30.3%, 32.2, 7 36.4% of their 3's respectively. So other than Lanier, only Mashack, who just attempts 1.5/gm makes > 1/3 of his 3's. Lanier has made more than any 2 others combined, and has made more than the entire team combined minus Ziegler. Also UT is not deep, only playing 7 guys (they do have an 8th guy that plays some, but probably not in this game unless they get 2 guards in foul trouble). I think fouls could be a big factor in this game, with neither team terribly deep, but especially if either Zeigler or Butler gets into foul trouble.
Should we win, I think Houston may be a bad matchup for us, because of how well they rebound.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
States that have yet to produce a UK player- Latest: the nail at the foul line
-