There was an analytic last year that showed teams with multiple runs of 11 points or more, and the success that followed We were in the top 3 I think all year, and then the tournament started. It’s seems to be a very legit statistic.
Young Sheldon and Brad Pitt agree.
I mentioned a day or two ago, at one time I was a tennis verifier (rating needed to play tournaments or adult leagues).
It drove me crazy(er) to have to debate a player's rating based on opinions: "he has a better serve, overhead, and net game so I am rating him higher than his opponent."
I looked at the final score first (the guy they rated higher, lost in straight sets); then points won; then game points won; then service winners; then service return winners ... yeah ... winners are pretty much always better than losers, but the final score is what really matters.
Bottom line is numbers trump opinion pretty much every time.
When I was being verified myself I was told I could play 3.5. I had just beaten a guy who had been playing 4.0 for years.
At the 4.0 Sectional Championship, my partner and I lost in the finals to players later "verified" as 4.5. (Great story on that match, but I don't want to drift off topic).
The 4.0 Sectional Championship was the last league match or tournament I played. (another great story not relevant to this thread).
