MBB: American Rivers Conference

[Gregory Sager]

I am tired of this crap "that is so tough to beat a team three times".I guess your saying B.V. is rooting  for Central (who they lost to) over Dubuque (who they handled quit easy twice)

Thats not what anyone, or myself is saying at all. 

I was merely stating that I hope Loras gets bounced out of the tournament and BV makes the finals.  Playing a team for a 3rd time in a year and beating them is a very difficult.  As far as I am concerned its is one of the toughest things to do in sports.

No, it isn't. I've been having this debate with some of the MIAA folks in their room, so I'll be repeating myself over here. But I don't mind. I don't have much to do tonight, anyway.

Here's why that "it's tough to beat a team three times" platitude is false:

If Team A beats Team B, then that outcome may or may not establish that Team A is better than Team B. Yes, Team A won that game, but there may have been mitigating circumstances (injuries, illnesses, a lucky bounce in a close game, homecourt advantage, etc.) that affected the outcome. Dominance may have been established (more likely if it was a blowout), or it may not have (more likely if it was a close game).

However, if Team A then beats Team B a second time, then the possibility that there were mitigating circumstances in both games decreases. The likelihood that Team A is simply better than Team B increases. In other words, if you beat a team twice in two matchups rather than once in one matchup, chances are greater that your team is better.

Given that, how could a third contest contravene what has been established after two matches? In other words, how does it become more likely that Team B can beat Team A after having lost to it twice already than it would be for Team B to beat Team A after having only lost to it once? Answer: It doesn't. The more that you beat a team, the more likely it is that you're simply better than that other team.

Not all outcomes are equal in basketball, of course, which leads to the second point: Buena Vista only beat Loras by two and by one this season, outcomes so narrow that a lucky bounce or a bad call could easily have determined both games. In other words, Buena Vista's established dominance over Loras is still, to some degree, an open question. But this is one highly specific instance. You can't translate this particular home-and-home series into a general rule, Klopenheimer. The burden of proof is upon the person using the "it's tough to beat a team three times" platitude. In order for it to contain any truth, it has to be universally applied. In other words, it has to hold just as true for Buena Vista having difficulty beating Luther a third time as it does for Buena Vista beating Loras a third time, because the whole idea behind a cliche is that it transcends particularities.

As to to the reasoning behind the platitude that you offer:

Your opponent has two games from the same season to study.  You beat a team twice in the last 2 mintues of each game.  All of that said, it means you are looking at another nail biting, gut wrenching game.

The adjustments rationale doesn't really hold water, because both teams can make adjustments in between games two and three. In other words, Bryan Van Haaften and his players are just as capable of fine-tuning their approach to Loras before Game Three as Greg Gorton and his players are capable of fine-tuning their approach to the Beavers. As for the second part of your rationale, I've addressed that above.

[doolittledog]

Dubuque wins 91-82 over Central

Next up Dubuque plays at BV on Thursday. 

[the_apprentice]

My head hurts from all this thinking.  

The point of my original comment is that with two tough close losses to BV, both of which could have gone the other with an unlucky bounce or a difficult official's call, Loras could come to Storm Lake next Saturday with a chip on their shoulder and will have no problem getting motivated seeking revenge.  Gorton won't need to pull any cheesy motivational tactics, Loras was already wearing their emotions on their sleeve last Saturday and they certainly have not been dominated by BV this year, its a very even match-up.  BV or any other team would certainly be motivated as well, there is an NCAA bid on the line after all!  Regardless of statistics or theoretical dissertations to prove or dis-prove the idea, you ask most coaches and they'll says its a challenge to beat any team three times in the same year, much less a talented, evenly matched opponent that you've been fortunate to play well against and maybe even get a few lucky bounces up until this point.

[The Show]

Coe up 4 at the half, 35-31.

Congrats to Dubuque for advancing.  Good news: You advance.  Bad news: You have to get on a bus and head to Storm Lake.

[Klopenhiemer]

I am tired of this crap "that is so tough to beat a team three times".I guess your saying B.V. is rooting  for Central (who they lost to) over Dubuque (who they handled quit easy twice)

Thats not what anyone, or myself is saying at all. 

I was merely stating that I hope Loras gets bounced out of the tournament and BV makes the finals.  Playing a team for a 3rd time in a year and beating them is a very difficult.  As far as I am concerned its is one of the toughest things to do in sports.

No, it isn't. I've been having this debate with some of the MIAA folks in their room, so I'll be repeating myself over here. But I don't mind. I don't have much to do tonight, anyway.

Here's why that "it's tough to beat a team three times" platitude is false:

If Team A beats Team B, then that outcome may or may not establish that Team A is better than Team B. Yes, Team A won that game, but there may have been mitigating circumstances (injuries, illnesses, a lucky bounce in a close game, homecourt advantage, etc.) that affected the outcome. Dominance may have been established (more likely if it was a blowout), or it may not have (more likely if it was a close game).

However, if Team A then beats Team B a second time, then the possibility that there were mitigating circumstances in both games decreases. The likelihood that Team A is simply better than Team B increases. In other words, if you beat a team twice in two matchups rather than once in one matchup, chances are greater that your team is better.

Given that, how could a third contest contravene what has been established after two matches? In other words, how does it become more likely that Team B can beat Team A after having lost to it twice already than it would be for Team B to beat Team A after having only lost to it once? Answer: It doesn't. The more that you beat a team, the more likely it is that you're simply better than that other team.

Not all outcomes are equal in basketball, of course, which leads to the second point: Buena Vista only beat Loras by two and by one this season, outcomes so narrow that a lucky bounce or a bad call could easily have determined both games. In other words, Buena Vista's established dominance over Loras is still, to some degree, an open question. But this is one highly specific instance. You can't translate this particular home-and-home series into a general rule, Klopenheimer. The burden of proof is upon the person using the "it's tough to beat a team three times" platitude. In order for it to contain any truth, it has to be universally applied. In other words, it has to hold just as true for Buena Vista having difficulty beating Luther a third time as it does for Buena Vista beating Loras a third time, because the whole idea behind a cliche is that it transcends particularities.

As to to the reasoning behind the platitude that you offer:

Your opponent has two games from the same season to study.  You beat a team twice in the last 2 mintues of each game.  All of that said, it means you are looking at another nail biting, gut wrenching game.

The adjustments rationale doesn't really hold water, because both teams can make adjustments in between games two and three. In other words, Bryan Van Haaften and his players are just as capable of fine-tuning their approach to Loras before Game Three as Greg Gorton and his players are capable of fine-tuning their approach to the Beavers. As for the second part of your rationale, I've addressed that above.

Greg,

I totally agree with what you are saying.  I think everything you said, is very true and very correct.  I should have stated that I was speaking from personal experience and was not speaking from an abstract theory. 

Your theory is no different than A=B, B=C, then A=C.  This is totally logic based and that can be proved with numbers.  The hole in your theory is that a lot times in my personal experience your theory is proven wrong.  Wheather it is mental, illness, or injury.  Whatever the case is, I have found as a former athlete, and scpectator the 3rd time you play in the same season, the ball isnt always bouncing your way. 

Lets face it, the ball bounced BV's way twice already this season.  What are the odds that Loras will get called for 5 more fouls than BV the next time, what are the odds that BV will have 3 starters fould out with 5 minutes left in the game, what are the odds that VH will get T'ed up and booted with 25 minutes left to play.  These are all things that can happen to influence the overall end result of the game. 

[Klopenhiemer]

Greg,

So I went back and took a look at recent BV basketball history.  I took at the last 5 years worth of games that BV has played. 

2006/2007
BV and Loras Played (3) times
-Loras won 2 out of 3

2005/2006
BV played Wartburg and Coe (3) times
-BV won 2 out of 3 against Coe
-BV won 2 out of 3 against Wartburg

2004/2005
BV and Wartburg played (3) times
-BV won 2 out of 3

2003/2004
BV played Coe (3) times
-BV won 2 out of 3

2002/2003
BV played Wartburg (3) times
-BV won 2 out of 3 times

In this same 5 year span BV did beat Coe 3 times in one year, and they did beat Loras 3 times in one year.  So this can be done.  The only point that I was trying to make was that this is a difficult feat, and if I was a player, I would not want to face the same team 3 years in a row. 

I think your ideas in theory are very good.  I am looking for evidence to support a theory, and thus make it a law.  BV's results can not make this theory a law.  Other schools might, and I would welcome the review of their results. 

[Gregory Sager]

My head hurts from all this thinking. 

The point of my original comment is that with two tough close losses to BV, both of which could have gone the other with an unlucky bounce or a difficult official's call, Loras could come to Storm Lake next Saturday with a chip on their shoulder and will have no problem getting motivated seeking revenge.  Gorton won't need to pull any cheesy motivational tactics, Loras was already wearing their emotions on their sleeve last Saturday and they certainly have not been dominated by BV this year, its a very even match-up.  BV or any other team would certainly be motivated as well, there is an NCAA bid on the line after all!  Regardless of statistics or theoretical dissertations to prove or dis-prove the idea, you ask most coaches and they'll says its a challenge to beat any team three times in the same year, much less a talented, evenly matched opponent that you've been fortunate to play well against and maybe even get a few lucky bounces up until this point.

You're citing coachspeak as a reason why the "hard to beat a team three times" platitude is true? Puh-leeze. Talking up an opponent is what coaches are supposed to do. Every coach's nightmare is that: a) his team will not take an opponent seriously; b) he'll unwittingly give an opponent bulletin-board material by taking that opponent too lightly when speaking to the media; or c) both.

Coachspeak has no bearing upon this discussion whatsoever.

Your theory is no different than A=B, B=C, then A=C.  This is totally logic based and that can be proved with numbers.  The hole in your theory is that a lot times in my personal experience your theory is proven wrong.  Wheather it is mental, illness, injury, psychological.  Whatever the case is, I have found as a former athlete, and scpectator the 3 time you play in the same season, the ball isnt always bouncing your way.

The plural of "anecdote" is not "data", Klopenheimer. Your particular nervousness when facing an opponent for the third time after having beaten them twice does not contravene what I've said above. There are any number of players who've been on the losing side twice who would have been intimidated at the prospect of having to face that team a third time -- whether they admit to it or not -- and any number of players who would say that having beaten a team twice already gives them an added fillip of confidence when they face that team a third time.

Lets face it, the ball bounced BV's way twice already this season.  What are the odds that Loras will get called for 5 more fouls than BV the next time, what are the odds that BV will have 3 starters fould out with 5 minutes left in the game, what are the odds that VH will get T'ed up and booted with 25 minutes left to play.  These are all things that can happen to influence the overall end result of the game.

Again, the specific instance of this season's home-and-home series between Buena Vista and Loras doesn't obviate the fact that the "it's tough to beat a team three times" general platitude is a whole lot of hooey.

As to your stated examples, the platitude is only ever cited when Team A has already beaten Team B twice before the third contest. Your examples do not indicate whether that was the case in those instances. Also, you're only citing examples that involve the top teams in the IIAC, which would naturally tend to lean closer to this year's Buena Vista and Loras scenario than normal. As I keep saying, if the platitude was true, it would be true in all instances. In other words, it would hold as true if Buena Vista and Luther, or Buena Vista and Simpson, were to meet a third time this season as it would for that third Buena Vista vs. Loras game.

[Klopenhiemer]

My head hurts from all this thinking. 

The point of my original comment is that with two tough close losses to BV, both of which could have gone the other with an unlucky bounce or a difficult official's call, Loras could come to Storm Lake next Saturday with a chip on their shoulder and will have no problem getting motivated seeking revenge.  Gorton won't need to pull any cheesy motivational tactics, Loras was already wearing their emotions on their sleeve last Saturday and they certainly have not been dominated by BV this year, its a very even match-up.  BV or any other team would certainly be motivated as well, there is an NCAA bid on the line after all!  Regardless of statistics or theoretical dissertations to prove or dis-prove the idea, you ask most coaches and they'll says its a challenge to beat any team three times in the same year, much less a talented, evenly matched opponent that you've been fortunate to play well against and maybe even get a few lucky bounces up until this point.

You're citing coachspeak as a reason why the "hard to beat a team three times" platitude is true? Puh-leeze. Talking up an opponent is what coaches are supposed to do. Every coach's nightmare is that: a) his team will not take an opponent seriously; b) he'll unwittingly give an opponent bulletin-board material by taking that opponent too lightly when speaking to the media; or c) both.

Coachspeak has no bearing upon this discussion whatsoever.

Your theory is no different than A=B, B=C, then A=C.  This is totally logic based and that can be proved with numbers.  The hole in your theory is that a lot times in my personal experience your theory is proven wrong.  Wheather it is mental, illness, injury, psychological.  Whatever the case is, I have found as a former athlete, and scpectator the 3 time you play in the same season, the ball isnt always bouncing your way.

The plural of "anecdote" is not "data", Klopenheimer. Your particular nervousness when facing an opponent for the third time after having beaten them twice does not contravene what I've said above. There are any number of players who've been on the losing side twice who would have been intimidated at the prospect of having to face that team a third time -- whether they admit to it or not -- and any number of players who would say that having beaten a team twice already gives them an added fillip of confidence when they face that team a third time.

Lets face it, the ball bounced BV's way twice already this season.  What are the odds that Loras will get called for 5 more fouls than BV the next time, what are the odds that BV will have 3 starters fould out with 5 minutes left in the game, what are the odds that VH will get T'ed up and booted with 25 minutes left to play.  These are all things that can happen to influence the overall end result of the game.

Again, the specific instance of this season's home-and-home series between Buena Vista and Loras doesn't obviate the fact that the "it's tough to beat a team three times" general platitude is a whole lot of hooey.

As to your stated examples, the platitude is only ever cited when Team A has already beaten Team B twice before the third contest. Your examples do not indicate whether that was the case in those instances. Also, you're only citing examples that involve the top teams in the IIAC, which would naturally tend to lean closer to this year's Buena Vista and Loras scenario than normal. As I keep saying, if the platitude was true, it would be true in all instances. In other words, it would hold as true if Buena Vista and Luther, or Buena Vista and Simpson, were to meet a third time this season as it would for that third Buena Vista vs. Loras game.

Greg,

I stepped off my lecturn and brougn evidence to into the equation, I am asking you to do the same.  See my last post. 

Klop. 

Klop.

[birds of prey]

Greg,

So I went back and took a look at recent BV basketball history.  I took at the last 5 years worth of games that BV has played. 

2006/2007
BV and Loras Played (3) times
-Loras won 2 out of 3

2005/2006
BV played Wartburg and Coe (3) times
-BV won 2 out of 3 against Coe
-BV won 2 out of 3 against Wartburg

2004/2005
BV and Wartburg played (3) times
-BV won 2 out of 3

2003/2004
BV played Coe (3) times
-BV won 2 out of 3

2002/2003
BV played Wartburg (3) times
-BV won 2 out of 3 times

In this same 5 year span BV did beat Coe 3 times in one year, and they did beat Loras 3 times in one year.  So this can be done.  The only point that I was trying to make was that this is a difficult feat, and if I was a player, I would not want to face the same team 3 years in a row. 

I think your ideas in theory are very good.  I am looking for evidence to support a theory, and thus make it a law.  BV's results can not make this theory a law.  Other schools might, and I would welcome the review of their results. 

I know for a fact that Loras beat BV 3 times last year...They went 15-1 in the regular season (only loss to Wartburg) and third time came in the IIAC Championship game by 15 points. I just looked at this briefly so I can't comment on the other 3 game series you mentioned that BV played in.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Klop, but you didn't bring "evidence" into the discussion until you answer Greg's question: in these 2 out of 3 series you mention, was the THIRD game the one that the 'underdog' won?  If they split the conference series, then of course they went 2-1 one way or the other.  How many were 2-0 before the third game?

[The Show]

How about we change it and say it's tough to beat a GOOD team 3 times in a season.  Happy?  

In other news, Dubuque and Coe advance, although it took Coe OT...

[Mr. Ypsi]

How about we change it and say it's tough to beat a GOOD team 3 times in a season.  Happy?  

Unless A. you're a BETTER team, or B. you play them 10 times!

Greg and I simply take exception to a tired coachspeak/sportscaster cliche, which is both illogical AND refuted by the historical record. 

WARNING: If Greg gets any more provocation, he may even put this above his preseason/nonconference obsession!

[Charlie Kohawk]

Cornell gave Coe all it wanted tonight. Clutch threes by Kevin Dux and Brian Brungard in OT. On to Loras with a ton of senior pride on the line.

[LCfan]

As a former CCIW football player and brother of a current Duhawk.....I wanted to inform the other CCIW posters that in fact not one time in the examples provided was a team 2-0 going into the third game.  And I am also tired of all the cliches in sports.  That being said, I would agree that with both the games being within 2 points it is not a forgone conclusion on who is the better team for reasons stated by Dr. Sager.  Should be a good game if they meet again.

How isnt White the player of the year again.  I know it typically goes to the conference winner but when BV does line changes, that affects any guy from their team from putting up the numbers needed to win MOP.  Leading the conference in points and second in rebounds by one or two rebounds.  Ha you might be able to tell whos brother I am....lol. 

Go Duhawks

[birds of prey]

As a former CCIW football player and brother of a current Duhawk.....I wanted to inform the other CCIW posters that in fact not one time in the examples provided was a team 2-0 going into the third game.  And I am also tired of all the cliches in sports.  That being said, I would agree that with both the games being within 2 points it is not a forgone conclusion on who is the better team for reasons stated by Dr. Sager.  Should be a good game if they meet again.

How isnt White the player of the year again.  I know it typically goes to the conference winner but when BV does line changes, that affects any guy from their team from putting up the numbers needed to win MOP.  Leading the conference in points and second in rebounds by one or two rebounds.  Ha you might be able to tell whos brother I am....lol. 

Go Duhawks

He's got my vote!