Cats @ Gators

#2
#2
No way lol, If Tennessee can handle Florida you all are going to be fine. Didn't Florida lose to Georgia the other day?
 
#4
#4
I'm a law of averages type of person, which brings to point the fact that no one has won a national title going into a tournament with a win streak this long since Indiana in 76. I don't want it, but I'm fine with a loss either tomorrow or in the SEC tourney.
 
#5
#5
Pulling for UK in basketball sucks, and particularly Cal, but there's just no other way around this.

Welcome to VN, OP. Don't agree with your prediction, though.
 
#7
#7
Yeah, Kentucky made a deal with the devil to have elite basketball in exchange for mediocre football. They will win because Mephistopheles is good on his deals.
 
#8
#8
Hardwood_fanatic said:
I'm a law of averages type of person, which brings to point the fact that no one has won a national title going into a tournament with a win streak this long since Indiana in 76. I don't want it, but I'm fine with a loss either tomorrow or in the SEC tourney.
Click to expand...

How about we come to an agreement. We'll face you in the championship game, and we'll beat you. How does that sound?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9
#9
I'd rather lose tomorrow than in tourney. A loss wouldn't be bad for the team anyway.
 
#12
#12
Hardwood_fanatic said:
I'm a law of averages type of person, which brings to point the fact that no one has won a national title going into a tournament with a win streak this long since Indiana in 76. I don't want it, but I'm fine with a loss either tomorrow or in the SEC tourney.
Click to expand...

Gambler's fallacy. Winning a lot of games in a row doesn't make you more likely to lose in the future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#13
#13
UTRavens said:
Gambler's fallacy. Winning a lot of games in a row doesn't make you more likely to lose in the future.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that's quite gambler's fallacy, but I see what you're trying to say


I've always been under the impression though that gambler's fallacy applied more to continued playing - mainly with regards to items of chance - being under the impression of /thinking "I'm/we're due"
 
#14
#14
UTRavens said:
Gambler's fallacy. Winning a lot of games in a row doesn't make you more likely to lose in the future.
Click to expand...

It's nothing to do with Gambler's fallacy. It is the FACT that no team has carried a win streak of 18+ games to a title in 36 years. That is a quantitative measurement, not a fallacy.
 
#17
#17
Hardwood_fanatic said:
It's nothing to do with Gambler's fallacy. It is the FACT that no team has carried a win streak of 18+ games to a title in 36 years. That is a quantitative measurement, not a fallacy.
Click to expand...

Is that the stat; is 18 the longest streak a championship team has entered the tournament on since '76?
 
#18
#18
ukvols said:
Is that the stat; is 18 the longest streak a championship team has entered the tournament on since '76?
Click to expand...

I heard it the other night, and I think it was 18. It was said during a game that wasn't Kentucky's, but they were talking about UK. I tried to research it the best I could, but could not find anything. One could look at every season and break it down, but that would be time consuming. I do believe it is 18, but I could be wrong.
 
#19
#19
I didn't have time to scan every team, but I looked at every champion from every year and their record. If they had 3 losses or less, I looked to see where the L's fell. Best I could find was UCLA in 95, who had a 13 game streak going into the tourney, and won 19 to finish it all. Of course UNLV had a 30 game streak before losing to Duke.
 
#20
#20
So, basically the streak that '98 UK had is historically preferred to the streak that '03 UK had.
 
#22
#22
Hardwood_fanatic said:
It's nothing to do with Gambler's fallacy. It is the FACT that no team has carried a win streak of 18+ games to a title in 36 years. That is a quantitative measurement, not a fallacy.
Click to expand...

The fallacy is the idea that having that kind of winning streak somehow makes you more likely to lose in the tournament than if you had a loss in there somewhere. That doesn't make any sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#23
#23
UTRavens said:
The fallacy is the idea that having that kind of winning streak somehow makes you more likely to lose in the tournament than if you had a loss in there somewhere. That doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...

Can't talk logic with a historian or a UK fan.
 
#25
#25
I'm using statistics and probability, you're trying to argue fallacy. In 36 years no one has taken a win streak of more than 13 games into the tourney and won the title. Several have taken win streaks like ours in and lost.

Having the win streak does not physically make a difference, and as you say does not make a team more likely to lose, which is not the point I am trying to make. I'm simply saying that statistically speaking, UK is defying the odds by winning the title with this win streak. It isn't "likely."

Not sure how much easier I can make this, even with crayon.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top